Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 <br />( #3 - #2169 Michael Renard - Continued) <br />Mabusth reported that the application was a renewal variance involving an average <br />lakeshore setback variance for 4' and hardcover variance in the 75 -250' setback proposed <br />at 26.7% based on the removal of a 168 s.f shed as required by the City in 1990. An <br />amended survey shows the 4' encroachment which was shown in three previous reviews at <br />1.5' but more accurate survey information confirms additions location. There is no change <br />in the footprint. The new footprint at approximately 15.5x26' is slightly smaller than <br />original proposal. The upper level extends over half of the lower level footprint of 15x26' <br />with the T bay extension. The improvement includes an expanded dining room, living <br />room, and foyer on the lower level and a master bedroom at the upper level. <br />Renard asked the Planning Commission to consider the inclusion of the 12x14' shed which <br />he valued at approximately $12,000. He said the application was originally agreed upon <br />with a previous owner who had no need for the shed. He said he uses the shed for bikes, <br />etc. Renard said he understands the concern for hardcover and the proximity to the <br />lakeshore and would be willing to remove plastic across the front in the landscape area of <br />about 300 s.f. He said this would allow relief from his hardship and add value to his <br />property and still be in keeping with the spirit of removal of hardcover close to the <br />lakeside. <br />• Hawn questioned the sight line of the neighbor noting no problem with one story but a <br />concern with a two story home. She noted the windows located on this side. Renard said <br />he spoke with his neighbors, the Smiths, who were shown the plans and signed the <br />acknowledgment letter. Mabusth said the letter was in the file. She added that both <br />neighbors on the north and south signed the letters and had no complaint with the <br />application. Renard also noted that the improvement proposed is smaller than that <br />requested by the previous owner. Hawn asked if Renard was willing to remove the <br />concrete picnic area. Renard said he would be willing to do so if it meant he could keep <br />the shed. <br />is <br />6 <br />