Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> � FILE#07-3305 <br /> 14 August 2007 <br /> � Page 3 of 3 <br /> Hardcover& Lake Setback Variances ` <br /> The applicant is requesting variances to a11ow lakeward and upward structural expansions <br /> of the existing home. Since the over 99% of the prop,erty is located within the 75' <br /> setback area, the property cannot be built on without variances. The existing home is <br /> approximately 25 feet wide and 75 feet long. The expansions proposed will almost <br /> double the width and add nearly 15 feet in length; all while bringing it closer to the lake <br /> on all sides. Resolution No. 3027, which granted vari �ance approval for the previous <br /> application, is attached as Exhibit C. Please review �he site plan attached to that <br /> resolution and compare it to E�ibit D. While there may be discrepancies between the � <br /> , <br /> hardcover analyses from one surveyor to another it does appear that the level of <br /> hardcover since 1991 has increased slightly in sidewalks, etc. <br /> Average Lakeshore Setback Variance <br /> The entire home on the property is located ahead of the average lakeshore setback line. <br /> Technically staff identifies this as a setback variance although it may be administratively <br /> granted due to the nature of the property. <br /> Hardship Analysis <br /> In considering applications for variance, tl:e Planning Commission sl:all consider tlie effect of tlee <br /> proposed variance upon ihe Iiealtle,safety and welfare of t/:e community, existing and anticipated traffic <br /> conditions, ligJ:t ai:d air, danger of fire, risk to tl:e public safety, and tl:e effect on values of property in <br /> tl:e surrounding area. TJ:e Pla�:ning Commission sl:all consider recommending approval for variances <br /> � � from t/ie literal provisions of tlte Zoning Code in instances where`tJieir strict enforcement would cause <br /> undue /iards/rip because of circu»rstances uniq"ue to the individual property under consideratioi:, and <br /> shal[ recommend approva!on[y when it is demonstrated t/iat sucl: actions will be in keeping witJ: tl:e <br /> spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. � <br /> Staff finds that while 99% of the applicant's property is located ahead of the 75' setback <br /> the property itself may be maxed out on hardcover as it+ exists. To construct additional <br /> structural hardcover, toward the lake on all sides, may:be reaching the level of excess. <br /> The property owner has a reasonable use of the property in the existing home. To add <br /> additional structure to this already overtaxed lot at such�a close proximity to the lake is <br /> unreasonable. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. The Planning Commission should discuss the merits of each of the applicant's <br /> Options and give the applicant direction. <br /> 2. Would the proposed structural additions give the appearance of excessive mass <br /> when viewed from the lake? When viewed from��neighboring properties? <br /> 3. Would the Planning Commission support structural additions (with additional <br /> hardcover reductions) toward the rear of the property at no greater encroachment <br /> toward the lake? <br /> 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> ; <br /> Staff Recommendation r <br /> i <br /> Planning Staff recommends denial of the variances. <br /> � 3 <br /> � <br />