Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR MAY 17,1999 <br />#2488 GREGG KLOHN. CONTINUED <br />Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing to rebuild a garage that was damaged in the May, <br />1998 storm. The new garage would be constructed In the same area of the existing garage. The <br />Applicant is proposing to construct the new garage four feet wider and five feet longer than the <br />existing garage, which would make it 14* by 24'. <br />Variances are required for side yard setback and rear yard setback. The existing and proposed <br />garage is located within the 250-500' lakeshore setback. A variance was granted in 1998 for <br />hardcover to be 35.1 percent instead of the allowed 30 percent. The Applicant then constructed <br />an addition smaller than approved and removed a shod that was also located in this hardcover area. <br />This reduced the hardcover to 32.8 percent. The proposed garage would increase the hardcover <br />in this setback area to 35.3 percent. <br />Weinberger stated that it is possible to locate the new garage in a spot that would meet the two <br />side yard setbacks and that he would like the Applicant to respond to that possibility. The <br />proposed side yard setback is three feet and the rear yard is 10.9 feet, which does m''et the <br />setback required. <br />City Staff is recommending denial of the variance due to the fact that the new garage could be <br />built on another location of the lot and be within all the setbacks. <br />Klohn stated the existing garage was destroyed by the storm last year which has prompted his <br />application tonight. Klohn commented that there are easements along North Shore Drive. Klohn <br />stated that he would not need to request a variance if he replaces the existing garage, but he <br />would like the garage door to face the street. <br />Klohn remarked that the location proposed by Weinberger is viable but he has not considered that <br />possibility before tonight. Klohn stated that if he constructed a garage in that location, the roof <br />of the garage would be located close to the ground and might not look as appealing as a garage <br />that matches the house. Klohn stated if the garage is constructed into the hill, he would like to <br />construct a 24' by 22' garage. <br />Klohn requested that the Planning Commission approve his application as submitted. <br />Lindquist indicated he agreed with Staffs recommendations. <br />Hawn indicated she also was in agreement with Staff, noting that a two car garage would exceed <br />hardcover and possibly structural coverage. <br />Weinberger commented that the property could handle more structural coverage, noting that this <br />proposal would bring it up to approximately 10 percent. <br />Klohn commented that he could perhaps construct a deck on top of the garage if it was located <br />into the hill. Klohn stated that it would probably still require a variance to the side yard setback. <br />Lindquist stated that it could be located ten feet from the side yard setback. <br />Klohn remarked that in his opinion it would probably be 6.5 feet. <br />Hawn stated that this application would probably be denied as presented, ard inquired whether <br />the Applicant would like the Planning Commission to table this application tc allow him additional <br />time to review his options. <br />Page 15