Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, April 8, 2019 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />__________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />13. LA19-000010 REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS ON BEHALF OF ALEXANDER <br /> AND AMY WARE, 2587 KELLEY AVENUE – RESOLUTION NO. <br /> <br />Barnhart stated the applicant is proposing a new 744 square foot garage with a setback of 4.3 feet from the side <br />yard line, which requires a variance and a conditional use permit. The existing 441 square foot garage is <br />currently two feet from the property line. The requirement for this district is 7.5 feet. <br /> <br />The conditional use permit will allow a full bathroom with a shower and a tub. The City does allow plumbing <br />in accessory buildings with a conditional use permit for the bath facility. Part of that is a covenant that <br />prevents it from being used as a dwelling. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission recommended approval. <br /> <br />Crosby asked what the side yard setback is currently. <br /> <br />Barnhart indicated it is currently 2.5 feet and it will go to 4.3 feet. <br /> <br />Johnson noted the required setback is 7.5 feet and the architectural firm said the reason for keeping it pushed <br />back is to not take away from the aesthetics of the house. <br /> <br />Jean Rehkamp noted there is also an easement that this property owner has with the neighbor for access. If the <br />garage is pushed forward, it makes it more difficult for the homeowners to park and navigate the driveway. In <br />addition, the neighbor’s garage is backed up to that driveway. It was felt the proposed location was the best <br />use of the site. There is also an existing cottage on the site that consists of 900 square feet and it is a darling, <br />quaint little cottage that has been restored. The extra space between the structures is to help maintain that little <br />charming structure. <br /> <br />Walsh noted there needs to be a practical difficulty demonstrated and that aesthetics is not a practical <br />difficulty. The garage is currently a nonconforming use and the applicants would like to make the structure <br />bigger, which is not a practical difficulty. <br /> <br />Rehkamp stated the distance from the easement to the front of the garage is part of that circulation. The <br />distance from that easement to the face of the garage is not enough to park a car in front of the garage. The <br />neighbors can back out into that given the easement. The property owners are hoping to have two cars and <br />storage in the garage. <br /> <br />Walsh noted the current garage is 20 feet width, which should be wide enough. <br /> <br />Rehkamp stated a typical garage is 24’ x 24’ and that they are asking for 30 feet to allow for storage on the <br />side. <br /> <br />Walsh asked what the square footage is of the existing garage. <br /> <br />Rehkamp indicated the footprint is 20.2 feet by 21.8 feet. <br /> <br />Walsh stated he would not have a problem with allowing them to the 90 feet as long as they maintain the <br />setback. <br /> <br />Johnson stated if the property owner wants to take advantage of the structure, then they should be able to <br />preserve what they have there, but when they start making a structure bigger and changing the massing, it <br />should conform to the City’s standards, especially because those have been increased in the past few years. <br />Johnson stated he does not see a practical difficulty for the side yard setback. The size and general location is <br />fine, but it should be 7.5 feet off the property line.