06-13-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

' % ■ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, May 16,2005 6:00 o’clock p.m. Gaffron noted a letter was received from Kathryn Alexander supporting her position regarding the request for variances. Gaffion stated at the last Planning Commission meeting the applicants had proposed side setback variances on both sides to allow a new home to be located IS.S feet from the north side lot line and 1S feet from the south side lot line. The applicants have since revised their plans and are now proposing a north tide setback of 18 feet where 30 feet would normally be required in addition to lot area and lot width variances. The applicants have eliminated the request for a south side setback variance. Staff recommends approval of the lot width and lot area variances. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission discuss the revised plans and determine whether there is hardship or justification for the side lot setback variance. Gaffron noted at the last meeting a discussion was had regarding the long narrow lot and how the same size footprint, without the side yard setback, would make the house longer and have a greater view impact on the neighbors. Gaffron stated the applicants are willing to remove two trees to relocate the driveway to meet the five-foot setback from the south lot line. GafGron noted there are no hardcover or structural issues on this property. Gustafton stated they have taken the Planning Commission’s comments into consideration and have revised their proposal to limit a variance on only one side of the property. Gustafson indicated he would prefer to q)iit the distance between both sides of the property line. Gustafron stated the trees that they are proposing to remove are cottonwoods and that the neighbors are not opposed to the removal. Gustafson distributed three different footprints of the type of home the property owners would prefer to be built on this lot. Gustafson indicated the neighbors are not particularly in favor of the house designs given the length of the house. Gustafson stated in his opinion the neighbors would prefer the difference be split and the house made wider, which is also the property owner’s preference. Rahn stated it appears that the survey conflicts with the original floor plan and questioned whether the deck and porch would encroach into the side yard setback. Rahn stated he would not be in favor of w* a jr^e-» as