My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-10-2021 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2021
>
05-10-2021 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/25/2021 1:53:17 PM
Creation date
5/25/2021 1:52:53 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,May 10,2021 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> 9. LA21-000023—MARK PRUETER,3215 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,VARIANCES RESOLUTION <br /> NO.7197—Continued <br /> Walsh said if the applicant wants to keep the non-conforming they could rebuild it the size that it is. If the <br /> applicant wants to make it bigger from a height perspective,they must conform on size which gives a 20 <br /> foot garage. <br /> Mr.Prueter pointed out they are asking for 82 square feet. He asked for 92 square foot addition of an <br /> entryway in 2007 and he was at the podium for an hour arguing that,which came to approval.He would <br /> imagine in driving the street the Council has seen some new construction; several homes have gone in <br /> that have doubled the size of the existing structure on property that is much smaller than his. He knows <br /> they all have their limitations for properties.He feels what they are asking for is reasonable and they tried <br /> to do it in a respectful manner,managing the setbacks they could for both neighbors and the City, and <br /> increase the garage size. If they are going to invest the money to build this,they would like to increase the <br /> space and be able to open the doors of the cars to get in and out.They are asking for additional height for <br /> additional storage as currently things are stacked in the rafters and the integrity of the rafters is no better <br /> than the foundation. The height is to allow for sufficient storage and for Mr. Prueter to be able to carry it <br /> into place.He noted the neighbors are supportive of the project. <br /> Walsh asked how big the lot is. <br /> Mr.Prueter replied at lakeshore it is 60 feet,rear is 35 feet,and about 140 feet deep and is a pie shape. <br /> Walsh said it is about '/4 acre. He noted it is already a practical difficulty with a small lot and setbacks;it <br /> would be about another foot of encroachment. Going up on a lot that is quite small—Walsh said every lot <br /> there is substandard from a zoning perspective and there has been a lot of leeway, especially with new <br /> construction. <br /> Crosby stated there is some height to the garages back there. <br /> Walsh said in the end,the applicant is trying to make a better placement by centering the garage and <br /> getting a little more space. He noted cars are not getting any smaller. Walsh acknowledges Johnson's <br /> issues but he knows the lots in this area are very tight and tiny from a width perspective.He thinks the <br /> applicant is trying to make the property better,and is still in compliance on one side,and just a bit of <br /> extra space is more benefit and the Council should give credit for that. He would be supportive of the <br /> application. <br /> Johnson said there is nothing preventing this from going farther back and closer to the house. For space, <br /> the garage can also go deeper. When they allow the massing increases on these very narrow spots,they <br /> get complaints about the water shedding off the roof onto the neighbors. <br /> Mr. Prueter asked to address those issues.His neighbors at 3205 Crystal Bay Road have a sizable garage <br /> with a similar design and height to what he would be achieving.He does not think they would outpace the <br /> Page 5 of 34 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.