Laserfiche WebLink
� <br /> � <br /> . . t <br /> � FILE#06-3189 s <br /> � 11 April 2006 �+` <br /> Page 4 of 4 ,. ' <br /> � fron: t11e litera!provisioils of 1/re Zo�ri►rg Code fn instmrces wlrere 1/reir slrict e�rforcenie�lt woulrl cause �� <br /> i �nrcltre /rards/elp becanse of clrc[rjttstarrces imlque to !!te 1�ttlivPdtra/properiy uittler co�rsitleratfo�t, afitl • <br /> ; sl�ul!recornmenr!approva! o�rly w/te�t lt �s rleino�rstrated t/rat suc11 acliars wl!!be in keepl�rg wilh tlre � <br /> ' splrit a�rrl lntent of ilre Orono ZonPng Code. i <br /> ; <br /> � , <br /> Planning staff finds that there are no hardships existing with ihe property to justify � <br /> � granting the average lakeshore setback, side setback and structural coverage variances as <br /> proposed although there may be hardsliips by which some level of hardcover variance for <br /> � the 75'-250' setback zone are justifiable. Staff feels that most of the variances could be � <br /> eliminated by reducing the size of the proposed home. . The applicants are proposing a <br /> ! 650 s.f. lakeside patio. The patio itself accounts for 10% hardcover within this zone. �. <br /> i <br /> � This patio inay be excessive considering the limitations of the lot. On the survey the � <br /> deck is labeled as a "dock", staff would note that any portion of"dock" that is located � <br /> � landward of the 929.4' elevation is considered as non-allowed hardcover in the 0-75' � <br /> ; zone, unless it is a 4' wide stairway leading directly to the lake. Additionally, staff feels �' <br /> � that the proposed 5.2' side setback is in an attempt to artificially raise the height of the <br /> � proposed home. Building height is measured from the highest point of existing grade at 7' <br /> ; the perimeter of the proposed home. In order to use the 978' elevation as the low � <br /> ' ineasuring point, the home would need to be actually located where it touches this <br /> ` elevation, and the only way to accomplish this is to encroach into the side yard setback. <br /> The shed within the 0-75' zone needs to be removed; a lock box is allowed within this <br /> � zone. � <br /> ,� <br /> � Issues for Consideration � � <br /> � Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? � <br /> � Staff Recommendation , ` <br /> � Planning StafF recommends denial of the 0-75' and 75'-250' hardcover variances, � <br /> average lake setback variance, structural coverage and the side yard setback variances. ;� <br /> However, staff would recommend the Planning Commission table the application for lot � <br /> area and lot width until the applicant submits a revised plan which comes closer to ; <br /> meeting the City's goals. - � <br /> � - <br /> ; <br /> f <br /> t <br /> E • <br /> � f, <br /> . ; <br /> ; I. <br /> r C <br /> ' � <br /> . � <br /> i � <br /> � <br /> ; <br /> , � <br /> � <br /> } � <br /> i <br /> i � <br /> � �. <br /> 4 <br /> i . . <br /> � <br /> � <br /> i � . <br />