Laserfiche WebLink
pile wMsoze <br />Ju-# IS 20C4 <br />Pa.«4cfS <br />BIttirSctbMk <br />This property has a lakcward slope which rises more than 25 feet above the OHWL and <br />rises to a height of 35 feet in a horizontal distance of 40 feet, which results in an average <br />slope of 87%. Since this exceeds 30%. it drains to the lake, it is definitely a bluff and the <br />deck encroaches into the “bluff impact zone’* (the bluff itself plus 20* back from the top <br />of the blufO and encroaches into the required 30’ bluff setback for structures <br />The house itself is located within the bluff setback zone and encroaches into the 30’ <br />setback for structures on bluffs. <br />Lake Setback V'artance <br />Approximately 60“b of the existing home is located within 75’ of the OHWL of Lake <br />Mir- tonka. Due to this, any deck constructed lakeside would need a lake setback <br />variance. <br />Also, there is minimal usable yard on the lakeside of the home approximately 15*18 feet <br />prior to the top of the bluff. Tlic deck will provide a safe place for the property owners to <br />enjoy their lake view immediately outside Uieir home The deck, as opj^osed to a patio or <br />lawn area, will have railings providing security near the 87% slope <br />Hardcover Variance <br />In 1992 the previous owners, in conjunction with variance approval, were icqiiired to <br />remove 90 s f. of hardcover. The Council at that time felt that there w.is no hardship to <br />permit a variance to increase the 0*75’ hardcover level. <br />Since that time, the existing path to the lake has been upgraded to a 4* stone paver path <br />with suirs .vhich provides a safer path down the steep slope. Thus, staff has detennined <br />that the hardcover calculated in 1992 did not include this existing path and nukes it <br />appear that the 2004 hardcovci calculation is 2“b higher than in 1992. The path <br />hardcover accounts for the additional 2%. not an increase in the size of the deck. <br />Hardship Statement <br />Applicant has completed the Hard.ship Documentation Form attached as lixhibit B. and <br />should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. <br />Hardship Analysis <br />In considtring applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the <br />proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic <br />conditions, light and air, danger offire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in <br />the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approxal for variances <br />from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause <br />undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and <br />shall recommend approxal only when It Is demonstrated that such actions wilt be in keeping with the <br />spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. <br />Staff finds that due to the existing location of the home there may be a hardship to allow <br />the deck to be rebuilt. Additionally, the deck provides a safe “yard” area for the <br />opplicants to enjoy the lake side of their property from the home.