11-15-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MM-MM No«cmb«r 15.2M4 Pat*3«f4 Hardcover Zone Total Area io Zmm Allowed Hardcover I'xisting Hardcover Proposed liaHcover Os.f 0 s r*Osf 0-75 12.048 s.f.mo)(0“/»)(0%) 75 - 250 33.125 s f.8.281 s r 8.903 s.f*8.280 s.f (25%)(26.9%)(25«o) 250-500 25.043 s.f.7.513 s.f. (30%) 1.082 s.f* (0.4%) 1.082 s f (0.4*/o) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscajMr beds Averace LalutlMrc Setback Variance The applicants have proposed a pool olT the lake side of the home and orienicJ towards the eastern half of the shore. In orienting the pool this way and w ith the pio| sed home pushed all the way to the average lakc.shore setback line, an average lakeshnre setback variance is needed for the pool The p<wl basin wt>uld encroach 45 feel and the pool decking would encroach 52 feet inlo the required setback Hardship Statement Applicant lta.s provided a Hardship Documentation Form in Exlilbil B. and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application Hardship Anaivsis_________________________________________________ In contUtriNft appUcationt for x-ariance, tht Planning Conuttiuhn thall contiJer Iht effect of the propoitd variarKe upon the kemMi. lofety and wetfore of the commnnlty, exbting and anticipated traffic condMont. light and air, danger offlre. rhk to the pmNk tafety. and the effect on talnet of property In the tnrronndlng area. The Planning Commiuien %hatl contUer recommending approval for variances from the literal provaionx of the Poning Code in Instance* where their itrict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances nnigne to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approsal only when it is demonstrated that such actions will he In keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that there arc hardships in order to grant the average lakcshore setback variance. 1 he primary intent with the average lakcshore setback requirement is to protect any views of the lake that neighboring properties may have In the past, variances have been granted to this requirement when it can be demonstrated that vievss will not be impacted and usually the evidence relates spcciallv to the land and hardships are found. The uniqueness of this property is that its shoreline almost creates a small point causing a home to be constructed almost 150’ from the shore in order to meet the average lakcshore setback when the neighboring properties houses arc only 90-95 feet from the shore. This means that the only alternative for a conforming pool Kveation would be to move the proposed house closer to the road, which severely impacts applicant’s views to the lake. It is also worth noting that the existing house and deck currently encroach into the average lakeshore setback and the proposed pool would not increase the existing encroachment .Also, the neighbor most impacted, to the east, has a pool in the lake yard winch is much closer to the lake than the applicant's proposed pool. But due to the