08-25-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

WJ-2936 August 18,2003 Page 4 of 8 of the hardcover in the zone. There also are retaining walls consisting of 53 s.f. or 1.2% hardcover in the zone. The applicants have not mentioned removing these and the slope leading to the lake is steep and highly vegetated. Thus, the walls are probably being used to control drainage and protect the deck. There is also a 226.26 s.f. lakeside deck which results in 5.0% of the hardcover. The applicants did minor repairs to the deck and would like to keep it. Lastly, the stairway is an allowed use on the 0-75’ zone and was not counted in the 14% hardcover figure and can remain. To be consistent in reviewing rebuilds, staff would recommend that the lakeside deck be removed. This would limit the hardcover in the 0-75’ zone to retaining walls (53 s.f.) and the allowed stairway. If the deck were removed, hardcover in the 0-75’ zone would be 53 s.f. or 1.2% when 0% is normally required. In the 250-500 ’zone there is approximately 2,194.5 s.f. or 34.8% hardcover. This includes the existing garage which has non-conforming setbacks, a concrete patio, and a conservative driveway. The applicants would like to tear down the existing garage and rebuild a three car garage meeting setback requirements. The concrete patio would be removed. The driveway would remain conser\'ative and include a tum-around for safety purposes. The proposed hardcover, taking into account the new garage and revised driveway, would bring the hardcover to 2,332.5 s.f. or 37%. Staff has found that the new garage and revised driveway are reasonable and that attempts have been made to meet Zoning Ordinance requirements. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit A, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shali consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and neifare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safely, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because ofcircums:jnces unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it Is demonstrated that such actions will be In keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. In the 0-75' zone, hardcover will be going from 14% to 6%. a greater than 50®/'o reduction. However, staff finds that no hardship exists to allow the lakeside deck to remain. The Planning Commission should decide whether the applicants have made a good faith effort in removing existing hardcover (fire-pit and concrete patio). The Planning Commission should also decide whether a hardship exists in the fact that the applicants bought the house with the deck and since have made minor repairs to improve it. In spite of this, to be consistent with prior rebuild applications, staff would recommend that it be removed due to a lack of a convincing hardship. Should the Planning Commission decide to require removal of the deck, the retaining walls, accounting for 53 s.f., could also be removed as they are controlling drainage to protect