08/19/2013 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,August 19 2013 6:30 o'clock p.m. The applicants are requesting approval of structural coverage, hardcover and setback variances to construct a new detached garage to be set back 20 feet from the rear property line. The proposed garage will meet a 10-foot setback from both sides. The property is conforming with respect to hardcover currently. However, in order to move the garage further from the street, additional driveway is needed. The applicants are requesting 27.3 percent hardcover where 25 percent is allowed. In addition,the applicants are proposing to keep an adjacent off street parking area next to the detached garage and have proposed a reduced 11-foot wide parking space with the additional driveway. The existing stairs accessing the property from the street/garage area will be reconstructed in a similar location on the northwest side of the driveway but will be moved out of the right-of-way. The current structural coverage is 14.7 percent where 15 percent is allowed. The existing garage is a 20' x 20' two-car garage. The new garage will be a total of 23 feet wide and 24 feet deep on the garage level and 23 feet wide by 22 feet deep on the lower storage level, which adds 506 square feet. The additional two feet of depth on the garage level is proposed to be achieved with a cantilevered floor. According to the definition of"building footprint," because it is greater than four feet above grade, the cantilevered area in this situation does not count toward the building footprint or hardcover. Even so,the 22' x 23' garage footprint will result in the property being over on structural coverage by about 100 square feet. Staff finds that the existing situation is less than ideal. The applicants' need to rebuild a deteriorating garage provides them with an opportunity to create a better and safer situation. There are practical difficulties in the width and topography of the lot as well as the proximity of the existing garage to the rear property line. The size of the existing garage is not functional. The applicants are attempting to construct a garage which will accommodate reasonable storage space for two vehicles. The variances for 27.3 percent hardcover and the structural coverage to permit 100 plus square feet of structure over 15 percent may also be reasonable considering the existing constraints of the property and alternate available solutions such as extensive filling and grading, tree removal, etc., which could potentially alter the character of the immediate area. The applicants' request is reasonable and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. It also results in minimal negative impact to the neighboring properties. Staff received comment from the neighboring property owners today and those have been distributed to the Planning Commissioners. Staff noted an inconsistency today between the survey and the plans for the garage and parking area. The applicants' plan indicates there is to be additional hardcover on the south side of the garage that is not shown as proposed on the survey. Further,there are areas of hardcover that are not accurately reflected on the survey. The applicant should be directed to resolve the inconsistencies prior to moving forward. Planning Staff recommends tabling the application. Curtis displayed the survey on the overhead and pointed out the location of the proposed garage. Thiesse asked how many inconsistencies Staff found on the survey. Curtis indicated there were two or three. Thiesse asked if one of the inconsistencies is the set of stairs that is proposed to be removed. Page 10 of 28