Laserfiche WebLink
� FILE#06-3232 <br /> 13 September 2006 <br /> ' Page 3 of 4 <br /> - Hlydcover C�Icul�tions: <br /> Iiardcover Zone Tot�l Are� in Allowed �sisting Proposecl <br /> Zone FIardcover �Iardcover Hardcover <br /> 0—75 7,384 s.f. 0 s.f 1,025 s.f.* 524s.f. <br /> (0%) (13.9%) (7%) <br /> 75—250 �5,445 s.f 3,861 s.f 5,413 s.f* � 5,017 s.f. <br /> (25%) (35%) (32.5%) <br /> * After exclusion of fabric or plasiic-lined 1lndscape beds <br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <br /> H�rdcover V�►ri�nce <br /> The applicants �re proposing to reduce from 13.9% to 7% hardcover within the 0-75' <br /> zone. The remaining hardcover will consist of a lakeside cieck, stairs, and retaining walls <br /> —previously porlions of the home were located within 75' of the lake. The applicants �re <br /> also requesting 32.5% hardcover wifihin the 75' — �250' zone. The applicants are <br /> removing fihe existing residence and hardcover which exceed the allowed limit for the 75' <br /> — 250' seiback zone at 35%. The existing home also encroaches infio the soufih side <br /> setblck and the 75' zone. The applicants are proposing to construct a home with a 3,21� <br /> s.�F. footprini including a cleck. ' <br /> The applicants' have proposed a driveway which will fiinction as a parking area as well <br /> as access to the property. Ivy Place is quite narrow and does not allow for any guest <br /> plrking or t�irn around. <br /> H�rdship St�tement • <br /> Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation rorm attached as �xhibit B, and <br /> should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. � <br /> H�rdship An�lysis , <br /> In considering applicrrrions for variance, lhe Plnn►ring Cnnrntissiun slrall consider tlre effect of!/te <br /> proposer!vnrionce upn�r Ilre Irenllll,st�ely and ivelfare of t/re caimrunity, �rist�ng n�7d nnliciprrted traffrc <br /> . cnnditlo�rs, !ig/rt«nd n}r, dn�rger of fire, risk to t/te public safefy, and ihe effecl on vrr/rres of prnperty�in <br /> t/re surroiu�din�nrea. Tlte Plrirrning Commisslon slral!consirler recomnre�rrling npproval far variances <br /> fronr tlre/ilera!pravisions of!/re Zoni�rg Code in insta�rces �vlrere !lreir slrlct e�rforcenrent ►votrlr!carrse <br /> «ndtre h�rdship becat�se of circtunsla�rces inrlque to tlre individua/property «�1der cnnsideratioir, rurd <br /> s/�n11 recnnunerrr!approva/ o�ily �v/reir i1 is rlenronslrnlerl t/ral srre/r nctio�rs rvll! be in keepnlg wit/r f/re <br /> spiril trnd inte�rt qf l/re Orniro Zaring Corle. � <br /> Sta�Ff finds it would not be unreasonable to grani some level of hardcover variance to <br /> support the proposed house which meets the setbacks and lot coverage stancl�trds. In <br /> order to meet the 25% harcicover limitation it would push the house fiirther back toward <br /> the road causing a"tunnel effeci" lake view, additionally the property owners would have <br /> a diff cult time parking guest vehicles (i.e. their children�,'veliicles) or maneuvering <br /> �tround on the property. At the direction of staff the applicant moved ihe liome lakew�rd <br /> slightly to be loclted in line with the neighboring homes while meeting the average <br /> sefiback and behind the 75' setback. However, while ihe lpplicani has proposed 14% <br /> structural cover�►ge is it reasonable to "max out" the 15% structural footprint when a <br /> hardcover variance is requested? SiafF would reason th11: the overall foofiprint�of the <br /> 3 <br />