Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Tuesday, February 19,2002 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />I <br />(#02-2746 Mark Finney, Continued) <br />in the 75-250’ lakeshore setback. Existing hardcover in the 75-250’ area consists of 5,851 square feet or <br />56.5 percent, with the Applicant proposing to reduce the hardcover to 3,838 square feet or 37 percent. <br />Weinberger stated the existing house is located adjacent to the North Shore Marina, which does have <br />two buildings used for storage and customer use just across the property line. The addition, located only <br />4’ from the property line, would leave a 10.8’ separation between the Marina building and the house, <br />which does meet the required separation distance between buildings. <br />The Applicant is also proposing a 32 ’ by 24’ detached garage. A building of that size would be <br />required to meet a minimum setback of 15’ to the property line. The Applicant has stated he is willing <br />«D construct a 30 ’ by 24’ building, which is a sUucture under 750 square feet, thus only requiring a 10’ <br />•iSifcack. The detached garage is intended for storage and would not have a driveway, <br />'*mh the garage door located on the east side of the building. <br />Weinberger stated the screen porch is located at the 75’ setback, with the deck basically following the <br />75’ foot line around the house. The Applicant has submitted a statement of hardship basically saying <br />that the existing house is located within the side yard setback and the attached garage will line up in the <br />same area. The addition would also help screen the boat yard from the property. In addition, the lot is <br />narrow and long, and by locating the addition within the side setback, it would allow for some yard <br />space to remain east of the house. Weinberger stated the existing garage would be removed out of the <br />75-250’ setback and a new garage would be constructed in the 250-500’ setback. <br />Staff recommends the addition be shiOed to meet at least a minimum setback to match the existing <br />setback of the house. The existing house is not parallel with the property line. Staff recommends <br />approval of the hardcover variance subject to the hardcover being reduced from 5,851 square feet to <br />3,838 square feet. <br />Finney stated he would like to construct the proposed garage as near to the property line as possible in <br />order io screen a bathroom facility located on the adjoining property. Finney stated he also would like <br />to screen off some of the boats. <br />There were no public comments regarding this application. <br />Kluth inquired whether the Applicant has considered planting trees and shrubs to screen rather than <br />using the garage for screening. <br />Finney stated he has shown his plans to the marina owner, who indicated he is happy with what is being <br />proposed and agrees with it. Finney stated the garage would also help create a pathway to one side, <br />noting he is located next to a commercial property. <br />Hawn stated she does have some sympathy towards this situation since it is located next to a <br />commercial site and the desire to screen the adjoining property. Hawn stated she would prefer to see the <br />new attached ..'rage match the house setback on the west side, especially near the neighbor’s building. <br />Rahn and KK i .greed with Hawn. <br />PAGE 29