02-19-2003 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Wcdacaday, Juury 22,2003 0:30 o’clock p.in. (M2-2a62 STEVEN GRONWALL, Cootloocd) Gronwill indicattd that he could rcmo\-c ^ patio slab at the rear of the house and consider reino\ing a bordered garden ekevi here. Bottenberg agreed that nut much else existed that could be remosed to maintain current lewis, although the patio would balance the equation. 2Uigscliwcrt moved, Haaoaford hccoodcd, lo approve Appikalioo N02-28S9, Sleveo Groowall, graodof rear yard setback aod sMc )ard adjacent street setback variances to permit construction ofas attnebed garage whb a second story to be located I4* from tbe side yard adjacent street fur tbe property at 1SI6 Long Lake Btvd. VOTE: Ayes 5, Na}*! I, Raka dtesenting. Rahn felt this proposal allowed tMi much mass mcreK 4.S’ from the pr iperty line. (•I 1) ••^2M^RICIIAII0 KAIL, 37S3 CASCO A\XM E, VARIANCES 11:46- 12:62 A.\l Richard Kail, Applicant, uas present. Bottenberg e.xplained that the applicant was requesting lot area and lot coverage by structure variances to construct a new residence on the properly. She pointed out that approximately 4 years ago the residence on the property burned and all that remains on the property is a foundation and accessory structure (detached garage). She added that, in 1995. the applicant applied for and \%as granted a lot area vanance to construct a new residence on the property, which has since expired. Since that time, the ownership of the subject property’ changed between family members, the applicant regained ownership and has applied for v*anances to construct a new residence on the property. ^^’herc4S the lot area is .37 acres in an LR-IC zoning district where .5 acres is required, and existing lots of record would be required to meet .4 acres. Bottenberg pointed out that in 1995 the applicant was granted a lot area variance. The proposed residence is 2.856 s.f. and a covered porch of406 s.f.. for a toul of 3.262 s f. (20^.). Bottenberg stated that the lot coverage by structures is over the allowed amount by 847.75 s.f. Bottenberg e.xplained that staff recommends approval of the lot area variance; however, based on city regulations staff recommends denial of the lot coverage by structure variance. Cha>r Smith indicated that while there would not be an issue with regard to the lot area vanance. the lot coverage vanance would likely not be approved. Kail indicated that if the lower porch were removed, they could eliminate 408 s.f There were iw pubiK comments. Rahn asked if the plan reHccled a two or three car garage. PAGE 27 of 29