Laserfiche WebLink
ritE *:4.3C2« <br />Ju-« ^5 2»» <br />P«;e 4 sf 5 <br />Bluff Setback <br />This property has a lakcward s!ope which rises more than 25 feel above the OH\\X and <br />rises 10 a height of 35 feet in a horizontal distance of 40 feet, which results m an average <br />slope of 87%. Since this exceeds 30%. it drains to the lake, it is dcfimtely a bluff and the <br />deck encroaches into the “bluff impact zone" (the bluff itself plus 20* back from the top <br />of the bluff) 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 Variance <br />Approximately 60% of the existing home :s located within 75’ of the OHWL of Lake <br />Mirmetonka. 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 apj .matcly 15*18 feel <br />prior to the top of the bluff. The deck w ill provide a safe place for the property owners to <br />enjoy their lake view immediately outside their home The deck, as opposed 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 wait variance approval, were required to <br />remove 90 s.f of hardcover. The Council at that time felt that there was 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 stairs which provides a safer path dow-n the steep slope. Thus, staff has determined <br />that the hardcover calculated in 1992 did not include this c.xisting path and makes it <br />appear that the 2004 hardcover calculation is 2% higher than in 1992 The path <br />hardcover accounts for the additional 2*-o. not an increase in the size of the deck <br />Hardship Statement <br />Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation form attached as Exlubit B. and <br />should be asked for additional testimony regarding "Jic application. <br />Hardship Analysis <br />In considering application* 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 approval 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 approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will 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 prov^cs a safe “yard" area for the