04-20-1998 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 16, 1998 (#4) #2292 Tom Okerstrom - Continued) Stoddard noted the problem with applicants coming back after building a home and asking for variances to build a garage. He suggested the property owner sign that they have been informed of such an issue when a residence is built. Mabusth noted that sometimes the owner and builder are the same. Dressier clarified that the shed removal was not a condition of the certificate of occupancy but the drainage correction was. Smith suggested diiection be given to the applicant. It was clarified that hardcover and structure size were issues of concern. Smith felt safety would be improved if the garage was moved further back. She suggested considering a smaller garage since the structural coverage would increase and due to the house only being two years old. Okerstrom voiced frustration with resubmitting a plan that was a result of Staff' recommendations and hearing that further reductions are now needed. Smith informed him that the Planning Commission did not have the opportunity previously to discuss the issues. She would not support the structural coverage as proposed. While she understands the need for a garage, she was concerned that variances are being requested only two years after the home was built Mabusth noted that the intensity of the structure is also an issue as the setback is substandard. Mabusth explained for Mrs. Okerstrom what is meant by being substandard Mabusth commented that the original house would have been smaller if the garage was built at the same time and considered with that application. Okerstrom said they were unable to aft'ord to build the garage at that time. He also indicated that the house is the same size as the previous house. Berg reiterated that the Commission tries to improve properties and decrease the amount of structure on a lot when new construction takes place. Dressier reviewed the direction given. The Commissioners agreed to a 20' setback and hardcover. Mabusth asked about intensity of mass in relation to the lot line. Stoddard indicated the house is new but a reduction from what existed He informed the applicant that if the motion is denied, the Council will review the application with that recommendation or the application can be tabled to allow the applicant to work with staff on further reductions. Okerstrom asked for direction on garage location. Smith informed him that the Commission cannot redesign the garage but a structural coverage reduction is necessary.