Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE PIAHHING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 19»8 <br />ZONING FILE #1316 CONTIN1 <br />Clint Gables of American Builders £ Associates, was present <br />on behalf of applicant. <br />Gaffron explained that made reference to a letter he had <br />received from Mr. Ian Booth, a neighbor of Mr. Barr's, opposing <br />the garage addition. Kelley read the letter, which spelled out <br />the reasons of opposition, aloud. Mr. Booth's reasons included <br />the fact that Mr. Barr already had-a 3-car garage, Mr. Barr has a <br />renter in the existing garage, and Orono has ordinances <br />pertaining to the subdivision of property for the purpose of <br />renting living space to individuals. <br />Gaffron explained what Mr. Barr was seeking in his <br />application. There is an existing house and 3-car garage that <br />has a loft-type unit above it. Mr. Barr received approval in the <br />late 1970's to install two pliimbing fixtures in that loft when it <br />was built. Mr. Barr would now like to construct a second garage <br />for the purpose ot storing old classic cars. His proposal is to <br />construct a 34' x 28' garage directly behind the existing garage <br />which would require a 3' setback. He would like to rebuild the <br />back wall of the existing garage so it would also be a wall for <br />the new garage. He would like to put a shop area above the new <br />garage. A setback variance would be required for attaching an <br />oversized structure to an existing structure that exceeds 1^000 <br />s.f. The second option would be to locate the existing garage and <br />the proposed garage adjacent with one another with a 10' <br />separation or an 8' separation. This plan however may result in <br />the loss of some mature trees. <br />Staff had recommended some alternatives. One would be to <br />reduce the size of the proposed garage which would allow it to be <br />built in two different luuetions that would save the trees. <br />Kelley stated that this proposal was awfully ambitious. He asked <br />Mr. Gables to present his information. Mr. Gables addressed the <br />issue of hardship. Mr. Barr collects classic cars that are <br />expensive and need to be housed. He also needs living space for <br />a caretaker of the cars since he is a pilot and is frequently <br />away from home. It was Mr. Gable's understanding that Mr. Barr's <br />brother-in-law inhabits the upper level of the existing garage <br />for the purpose ^>f security. The second hardship would be that <br />Mr. Barr will be married shortly which will result in the <br />addition of two more automobiles requiring storage. Mr. Gables <br />expressed what, in his opinion, were the hardships in this <br />matter. One would be the runoff, two would be the depreciation <br />to the land due to the destruction of the trees. Mr. Gables <br />stated that plan A would cause the least amount of damage to the <br />environment and would be the most aesthetically pleasing. Plan A <br />would effectively deal with the natural runoff of the land. It <br />would also provide the greatest redv.ction in hardcover. Plan B <br />and C would require more excavating and the removal of several <br />mature trees. They would also not deal with runoff as well as <br />Plan A.