Laserfiche WebLink
L <br />/a v^.K •« ij <br />V *V V <br />/•'• V <br />•; • <br />- • . •• <br />•# • <br />W » <br />• f <br />.•:v;\f" •. r •I - " <br />S-.1 <br />Dr. Domis and Diane Killian Variance Application 3/18/03 <br />DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST <br />We are a couple who are raising our niece in our home. We would like to build a <br />lakeside home to live in which is sufficient size for us to comfortably raise our niece. <br />Our request is that we can build such a house, or. our double lot, as it is described in this <br />Variance application <br />Additional Background Information ; <br />(This section was written with the Toths, our new neighbors, with whom we coordinated <br />our home design. So, it is very similar to the description in ^eir Variance application) <br />We own 3 adjacent properties and are plarming to build a home for ourselves at 1300 <br />Spruce Place and sell 1280 and 1290 Spruce to the Toths, a very nice couple, for their <br />retirement home. <br />We are extremely sensitive to the delicate lakefront ecology and have worked closely <br />with the Killians and our designers to come up with a plan, which will significantly <br />improve the beauty and lakefront environment of these adjacent parcels. <br />In a nutshell, the net impact of our two proposals (Toths’ and Killians’) is to remove <br />about 3,000 square feet of hardcover from the 0’-7S’ lake finnt zone. 3,000 square feet is <br />the equivalent of one good sized or two extremely modest homes. The only man made <br />items left in that zone are essential existing retaining walls needed for erosion control, <br />and existing stairs so that we can walk to the edge of the water. Additionally, the net <br />effect of our two proposals will be to reduce the overall site hardcover from 42% to 39% <br />while removing a significant portion of hardcover which is presently in the 0’-7S zone <br />and placing a reduced amount well within present day set backs. <br />We have met several times with Orono planning ofQcials and have continued to reduce <br />the .size of our proposed home until it has reached what we consider a functional <br />mimmum <br />HARDSmP/DESCRlPTlON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS <br />As is the case with our future neighbors, the Toth’s, it is our understanding th&* Uiese lots <br />were subdivided at a time when the city’s lot requirements were much smaller. <br />Subsequently, the area has been re-zoned with much higher minimum lot size requirements. <br />This re-zoning has created a hardship by making historically buildable lots unbuildable. <br />We therefore request that the city grants us a variance regarding minimum lot size and <br />maximum allowable hardcover for these lots. <br />Additionally, this double lot, which we purchased, has a “fan” shape, in which the <br />largest part of the lot is facing the lake. This is one of the things, which made this lot <br />attractive to us. (See Sheet M2 of attached supporting documents.) <br />Unfortunately, this fan shape creates a configuration hardship because the shape of the <br />lot places a high percentage of the lot area in the 0’-7S’ setback. At the same time the <br />i <br />Lj.