09-22-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M03-2944 Scptcmlxr 15,2003 Pag*3 of5 Hardcover Calculations; Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 6,898 s.f Os.f 0 s.f.*0 s.f. (0%)( O^o)( 0«/o) 75 - 250 8,258 s.f.2,065 s.f.4,008 s.f.*3,968.45 s.f. (25%)(48.5%)(48%) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Hardcover Variance The applicants are required to apply for a hardcover variance because the existing property is over on hardcover. A patio currently exists under where the deck is proposed and therefore hardcover amounts will not change on the property. The deck that was there prior to demolition included a staircase that extended towards the side property line. The new plans for the deck /eplacement show the stairs moved within the footprint of the deck. Because the previous staircase was not over the patio, hardcover is being reduced by 40 square feet w ith the relocation of this staircase. 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 appiications for variance th^ Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, s-jcty and . elfate of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions fight and air, dang '# of fire, rL k to the public safety, and the effect on values of property hi the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for vft iances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under considetotion, and shall recommend approval only when It Is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and Intern of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that a hardship exists in that the property is over on hardcover wiuh or without the replacement of ihe deck due to an 859 square foot patio. The applicants are merely replacing a deck that was rotted and unsafe and hardcover amounts will not increase. The Planning Comnussion should discuss whether the applicant has the right to replace a deck which has already been tom down and no evidence exists to confirm its size. The planning C‘^*''’;iiisjion should a! ',o discuss whether this is even important due to the existing patii and that the lot isn’t over on stmctural coverage. Because the 75-250 ’ hardcover exceeds ih • 7'% limit, staff would recommend that the existing patio be reduced in an attempt to reduce hardcover on the property should a variance be granted allowing the deck to be replaced at 26 x 10 foot size.