Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday, September 21,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> widening the garage,the doors, making it accessible to their father-in-law, including the bedroom and <br /> bathroom space to accommodate him. He said that is the main driving force, however,they also want to <br /> point out the neighborhood and the variances they're asking for are consistent with the neighborhood. He <br /> noted they tried to be very mindful of that in building the home, stating a home was built at 1973 <br /> Fagerness which is the identical design to their home. His understanding is that there were multiple <br /> variances given, they have a 20-foot wide driveway and are much closer to the street than what Mr. <br /> Briggs is proposing, and that was recently completed. He noted some other examples, regarding the <br /> design of his original home and said when looking at the property it is very vertical and feels very tall, <br /> almost three stories. He said what they're proposing softens those lines of the home and by his <br /> understanding they've received unanimous support in building it from their direct neighbors as well as <br /> three other neighbors(information which has been provided). Mr. Briggs said he doesn't know if they <br /> necessarily need all the variances they applied for; for example, in the corner, one foot of the stairway is <br /> encroaching, and he noted they can move that back. He stated there are no sight-line issues with either <br /> neighbor. Regarding parking, they will actually increase their parking, noting that currently one car can be <br /> parked in their garage and this will allow two cars in the garage,two cars in the driveway and three cars <br /> in their parking spot, which is more parking than any of their neighbors. Mr. Briggs said the Practical <br /> Difficulty standpoint is important, as the only place they can build a bedroom that would be accessible, <br /> while still accommodating their three children, is where it is proposed. He noted they're willing to be <br /> flexible and what is most important is that they're able to accommodate their father-in-law, care for him <br /> and still give their children their own bedrooms,while still meeting the neighborhood design. <br /> Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. <br /> Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. <br /> Chair Ressler noted Mr. Briggs mentioned one thing that might be a friendly amendment is the average <br /> lakeshore setback and it appears that the line goes further than what was understood by the Applicant and <br /> asked Ms. Oakden if that is correct. <br /> Ms. Oakden replied when the application was first submitted,this line(noted onscreen), was not shown <br /> on the Survey and is something Staff required as part of the review. Once applied, Staff identified that <br /> the average lakeshore setback variance would be required and was published as such. If the Applicant <br /> wishes to meet the setback,the entire corner would need to be removed or behind the line. <br /> Chair Ressler asked if that is inclusive of stairs. <br /> Ms. Oakden responded yes, inclusive of stairs as they'd only allow up to 42 inches to encroach, so if the <br /> stairs rise over 42 inches above existing grade, it is seen as an encroachment. She showed onscreen that <br /> the stairs rise relatively steeply, so the homeowner would have to provide elevations and show that they <br /> meet the average lakeshore setback in any amended plans they may wish to submit. <br /> Chair Ressler asked how the stairs are currently. <br /> Ms. Oakden showed a current elevation onscreen,noting a relatively flat driveway and that the stairs go <br /> up in a curved fashion, noting she doesn't have elevation measurements on the stairs,but they would <br /> measure from existing grade per the survey. <br /> Page 11 of 27 <br />