08-21-2000 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUlf S OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 17,2000 (#6) #2601 JOHN AND KAREN BLANK. 2100 SUGARWOOD DRIVE - VARIANCE, 8:19 p.m. - 8:37 p.m. Karen Blank, Applicant, was present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Bottenberg stated the Applicants are proposing to construct a 29’ by 55’ S|K>rt couit at the rear of their property. The proposed sport eourt would be loeated ten feet from the rear property line where 50 feet is required. Bottenberg indicated this property* lies within the Sugar Woods development, with Resolution No. 2653 being adopted in July of 1989, ercating Sugar Woods as a Planned Residential Development. Tlie resolution states approval was based on limiting the development and future use of property within the Sugar Woods development. It specifically defines building setbacks and limits hardcover improvements. Bottenberg indicated performance standards were established for each lot and allows a building pad for principal and accessory structures by establishing specific setbacks (50’ front and rear, 30' sides). The resolution limits hardcover to 80 percent of the building pad and lot coverage to 15 percent of the entire lot. The only hardcover allowed outside the defined building pad is a narrow driveway to the road. Bottenberg stated these standards were established not only to pro\ idc buffers but to protect the wooded character of the unique Sugar Woods property. The Applicants have presented their proposal to the Sugar Woods Homeouners Association as required. The Board of Directors of the Sugar Woods Homeowners Association unanimously approved the plan. In Staff s opinion the abbreviated process was not intended to apply to accessory structure setback variances, especially when such structures would not only be in violation of the more restrictive standards for Sugar Woods, but would also not meet the less restrictive general zoning standards or the standards for the underlying R-IA zoning district. Bottenberg stated the total property hardcover, including the sport court and c.xisting driveway, will be an area equivalent to just under 57 percent of the building pad area, meeting the 80 percent limitation. Blank stated their hardship relates to the trees in the area, noting that there arc some very large Maples they would like to save. Blank commented they have attempted to locate the sport court in the place w here they w ill save the most large trees and to allow room for a gazebo. Blank stated by mo\ ing the sport court forward, they would be required to remove a couple of large trees. Smith commented that the Applicant w ould be required to remove a number of small trees with the sport court in the proposed location. Blank stated in her opinion those trees are scruffy trees Smith stated that one of the inherent features to the Sugar Woods area is the heavily wooded trees along the rear property lines, which this setback has been designed to protect. PAGE 16