Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Monday, September 19, 2022 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 2 of 9 <br /> <br />Curtis stated the Applicant has the option of reducing the hardcover and installing a grade level patio <br />without variances. The side yard setback variance involving the roof expansion may be reasonable if the <br />encroachments do not further limit the light, air, and open space of the neighbors to the west. If the <br />Commission identifies practical difficulties which support the roof changes in the side yard area, the new <br />encroachments should be limited to the roof and any additional new impacts, such as roof overhangs and <br />the possible new shed roof over kitchen window, should be denied. The average lakeshore setback <br />variance to change the hip configuration to a gable thereby increasing the mass of the roof within the <br />setback significantly is not supported by practical difficulty. Staff recommends denial. <br /> <br />Scott Gates, 545 Second St. #295, Excelsior, noted it is not terribly complicated and the owners wanted to <br />get the remodel underway prior to the variance being heard. He noted they scaled down the hardcover <br />significantly and if these changes are not acceptable, they will go ahead and build what has been <br />submitted for the building permit. He walked the Commissioners through the project and spoke about the <br />overhang, encroachments, setbacks, a bay window, and neighbor comments. Mr. Gates showed proposed <br />plans on screen and shared about the various views, roof pitch, and massing. <br /> <br />Ressler asked about practical difficulty on the project. <br /> <br />Mr. Gates replied the practical difficulty is the location of the home. The setback is similar to the <br />neighboring house, with 2813 set back considerably more, with 2821, 2825, and 2827 at about 79-80 feet <br />and this property is at around 120 feet. The house next door is what creates the issues regarding average <br />lakeshore setback (ALS). The practical difficulty of the deck is that there is nowhere else to put it. <br /> <br />Ressler clarified they could put in a patio. <br /> <br />Curtis noted they could do it on grade or a patio. <br /> <br />Mr. Gates spoke about what is intended to be an at-grade deck, and they could do the 10x16 provided <br />they meet hardcover or get a variance and the other is to have a lakeside deck with access to the family <br />living space. <br /> <br />Kirchner clarified Mr. Gates is saying the practical difficulty is that it is a convenience to have a deck or <br />the desire for the owners to have a deck. <br /> <br />Mr. Gates replied in the negative noting he is saying there is not another place to put it that has access to <br />the lake view. Because this is considerably farther back than the 75 foot minimum lakeshore setback that, <br />coupled with the ALS being further back due to the offset of the house next door are both practical <br />difficulties that make this the only choice. <br /> <br />Kirchner asked what structural purpose the new roof serves that then provides additional massing. <br /> <br />Mr. Gates replied the existing roof needs replacement and once they start replacing it makes sense to go <br />to something cleaner and simpler without all the angles to the roof. He thinks it is also a design <br />consideration in trying to fit into the neighborhood, make something that looks good by mixing the gable <br />with the hip. <br /> <br />Ressler spoke about practical difficulty. He stated the location of the house is something the owner knew <br />when they purchased it and every zone has different requirements and guidelines. The existing house is