08-11-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

/ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, May 19,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. (#7 <103-2893 JOHN AND ROBERTA HENRICH, Continued) Gaffron relayed staff recommendations, as follows: • Approval of the variances for lot area based on the fact the lot is developed as a single family dwelling, has been provided sanitary sewer service and it would not be possible to acquire additional land to create a conforming lot. • Approval of the average setback and accessory structure variances as described above. Determine whether the deck will remain in place or whether a variance to top-of-bluff setback would be allowed for its replacement. • It would be most consistent with City actions over the past 3-4 years to deny the variance for exceeding 25% hardcover in the 75-250' zone for new construction. In order to approve the request. Planning Commission must make findings about the unique aspects of this property that rise to the level of a hardship to the property. Mr. Henrich pointed out that their structure was quite modest at merely 8% coverage and that they had built the garage in its current location in an effort to maintain the unique landscaping aspects of the property, including the grove of lilacs. He maintained that the access was designed in its current configuration based on City recommendations and numerous discussions. He stated that one of their hardships was exiting the driveway safely in the winter due to the grades. In addition, he noted that it would take a pretty significant amount of reworking and a great deal of money to make enormous changes to the lot and its character to accommodate the requirements. Gaffron concurred that it would take a great deal of substantial changes to make the property conform, which in turn would change tlie entire character of the property. While they looked into remodeling, Henrich acknowledged that the home was 80 years old and in ne^ of total repair. They had decided to rebuild ai J felt their hardships justified their application. Although cost was not an acceptable hardship alone, Hawn agreed that the property was steep and that it would be very expensive to change it. Mrs. Henrich stated that they had made attempts to rework the garage in the design phase only to be confronted with new drainage issues. Henrich stated that he would be hesitant to remove, or lose, his relatively new and sen'iceable garage in order to construct his home. He was given a variance and built the garage in 1990 and felt removing the garage would have little impact on the placement of the house. PAGE 25 of 39