03-18-2002 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19,2002 6:30 o'clock p.oi. («10) #02-2748 RICHARD A. AND NANCY MARZAN, 2795 PHEASANT ROAD, VARIANCE, 10:06 p.m. -10:28 p.m. Richard Marzan, Applicant, and Kathy Alexander, Home Designer, were present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Bottenberg stated the Applicant is requesting a hardcover variance in the 0-75 ’ setback area to allow a 216 square foot deck and 20 square foot shed located by the lakeshore to remain on the property. A portion of the deck has a roof but is not enclosed. Bottenberg stated the Applicant owns the property and received a building permit in January of 2002, to construct a new residence on the property. The new residence meets all standards for the LR-1B zoning district. All that remains in the 0-75 ’ setback zone are the steps leading to the lake, a deck, shed, and two retaining walls. Bottenberg indicated the topography of the property is fairly flat except approximately 45’ from the lakeshore, at which point it drops significantly to the lake. The City does not have a permit on file for the deck or shed, although it appears it has been there for many years. A review of City files has determined that a boat house was located there at least until 1986. The zoning code allows stairways up to 4’ wide, but landings no more than 32 square feet in area. Decks and roofed shelters are not allowed. Bottenberg indicated the shelter is painted while and is quite noticeable from the lake. Alexander stated instead of remodeling the existing house, they elected to pull the house back beyond the 75’ mark, and also attempted to comply with all the other regulations and building standards applicable to this lot. Alexander stated the Applicant would like to retain the shed and try to blend it in more with the property. Alexander noted this is a pre-existing condition. There were no public comments relating to this application. Hawn inquired why the Planning Commission did not see this matter prior to the time the building piermit was issued. Weinberger stated the Applicants did contact Staff prior to applying for a building permit, noting an agreement was reached that if the deck and shed were not approved, they would be removed. Kluth inquired what the hardship is for keeping that structure. Alexander stated her understanding is that since there is not a primary structure currently, they need a variance to keep the shed llawTi stated there are two variances being requested tonight. The first one relates to allowing an accessory structure to remain without a principal structure. Hawn stated when the existing residence is tom down and a new residence is to be constructed on the lot, the project is then considered to be new construction and a hardship inherent with the land must be demonstrated on why the shed should remain. PAGE 23