Laserfiche WebLink
Attachment#3 <br /> Petition For Variance By Thomas J. and Ann Powers <br /> 1012 Blackburn Road <br /> Criteria For Granting Variance <br /> 1. Hardship <br /> A An unnecessary hardship is present with respect to the provision in Section <br /> 4.4(9)(b)(3) of the Ordinance that requires all expansion to be no closer to the <br /> water than the landward fagade of the existing structure. The hardship is present <br /> because the contours and other features of the property do not reasonably allow <br /> for compliance with that requirement. <br /> a) The existing structure is a rectangular walkout rambler built into the end of a <br /> ridge. The short sides of the structure are the shore and landward sides. There <br /> are steep drop offs on both of those sides. The drop off on the landward side <br /> begins less than 12 feet from the structure's landward fagade. That drop off <br /> runs down to a wetland area. Because of the proximity and slope of the drop <br /> off, the proximity of the wetlands, and the fact that the landward fagade is the <br /> short side of the structure, it would be a very difficult, if not impossible, to <br /> construct an entire addition which is no closer to the water than the landward <br /> facade. <br /> b) The front side of the house faces into the ridge. The well, sewer line and <br /> septic system are all located on that side. It would not be possible to construct <br /> an addition which extends beyond the front side fagade of the structure. <br /> c) The back side of the structure is one of the long sides. It faces away from the <br /> ridge and contains the walkout. There is a relatively flat portion of the <br /> property extending out from the back side. <br /> d) Taking into consideration (1) the restrictive property features of the front and <br /> landward sides of the existing structure and (2) the construction compatible <br /> features of the property on the back side of the structure, it would be both <br /> reasonable and logical to construct the proposed addition so that a portion is <br /> both on the back side of the structure and closer to the water than the <br /> landward fagade of the existing structure. Applying the provisions of the <br /> Ordinance to require that the entire addition be no closer to the water than the <br /> landward fagade of the existing structure would be an unnecessary hardship. <br /> B An unnecessary hardship is present with respect to the provision in Section <br /> 4.4(9)(b)(2) of the Ordinance limiting the total area of the existing structure and the <br />