04-16-2001 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

property line where 35' is required, so a setback variance is no longer needed. Lot coverage and hardcover variances are requested, although each currently exceeds the standards and shows a slight reduction from existing levels. Hardcover The garage addition ••• located in the 75-250* setback /one. Hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone is currently 4.685 s.f. or 54.4 *!o (e.xcluding mmconfomiing rock'plastic which must be removed). Tlie applicants are proposing to remove a large portion of the deck on the lake side of the residence in order to reduce hardcover and structure, and will also be rearranging driveway and sidewalk hardcover. AHer proposed removals, hardcover in the 75-250* setback zone will be 4.501 s.f or 52.2 %. 1 lardcov er in the 0-75* zone is also decreasing via removal of deck portions as well as a stairway and some retaining wall sections, l-xisting legal 0-75* hardcover is 584 s.f or 8.3 %. Proposed 0- 75’ hardcover is 249 s.f or 3.5 %. Structural Coverage The structural coverage currently on the lot is 3.41 6 s.f or 21.8 ®/o. The garage addition and removal of a portion of tlie decks will result in structural coverage of 3,280 s.f or 20.9 ®o. Of this amount. 12.8®b is the existing house and garage addition, while 8.1 % is deck and pool stnicturc which arc structure by definition due to their heights above grade, a result of the slope of the site. Prior Applications Three prior owners of this propertv have made previous zoning applications for the site. 1 his properly was grantcHl a variance in 1978 to allow the pool to be constructed 3’ from the side lot line. The property was again the subject of a v ariance request in 1985-86, this time for aUer-the- fact decks. The owner constructed decks around the pool area and along the lake side of the house without permits. Ilie result of that variance approval was a requirement to remove portions of the new decks, while certain .segments of deck were considered as non-hardcover due to height above ground, board spacing and permeable grass below (a quirk in Orono's hardcover policies that lasted only for a year or two in the mid-1980s). A third application was approved in 1997 for a CUI* to reconstruct retaining walls in the 0-75* zone. The current survey when compared to the approved 1985 deck plan shows that the required deck removals were apparently never completed by the then property owner, although the decks were inspected in 1986. The current owners will be removing the unapproved portions of deck a« well as additional portions, as part of the current request. Note that the deck segments approved as non-hardcover in 1985 are considered as hardcover under current code, and have been included in the hardcover calculations. WI-2664 Much and Kim Olson 3265 Carman Road i’anances 4^mooi Pagtl