Project Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 17, 2016 6:30 o'clock p.m. Lemke asked if the applicant has spoken with the neighbors. Amy Sullivan indicated they have and that no one had any objection. Lemke commented the building makes sense. Leskinen stated in her view it meets the practical difficulty criteria as outlined in Staff's report. Leskinen stated given the deep setback of the house, there really is no other place to locate the structure. Thiesse noted all the other zoning requirements are met. Schoenzeit stated the proposal seems reasonable. Schwingler moved, Schoenzeit seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 16-3872, Revision, LLC, on behalf of Timothy and Amy Sullivan, 440 Brown Road South, granting of a variance subject to the property owners agreeing to the oversized accessory structure covenants that will be contained within the approval resolution and septic information being submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. #16-3873 RYAN AND NATALIE BLACKWELL, 80 SMITH AVENUE, Vn..a~~ .M. -7:01 P.M. an Blackwell, Applicants, were present. Curtis stated the ap · ants ' home is situated as close as 17.8 feet to the fro ot line, which is Smith Avenue, 11.8 feet from north side lot line, approximately 90 feet fro yman Avenue on the side, and over 200 feet from the rear ine. The majority of the home is none forming with respect to the front and si de yard setbacks , althougli e house as it is could be legally r uilt in kind in its current location. The applicants are proposing to constru footprint and second oor additions to the existing home which will allow for additional bedrooms and liv1 space. The aP. icants are proposing a 12-foot extension towards the street resulting in a 22 .3 foot setba as well expansion of the garage 11 feet also within the front 50-foot setback. With the exception oft 15 ' 19 ' master bedroom at the rear of the hou se, the entire home is located within the 50-foot setback. T roposed expansions of the second story over the existing home and proposed additional both requi fron nd side yard setback variances. In addition, two new rear decks are proposed, with varianc being requ · d. Staff has provided an analysis of the prac ·cal difficulties within t Staff report and the Planning Commission may ask for additional te mony regarding this applicat or discuss the practical difficulty criteria. received regarding this project. Staff find s that the nonconfi · ng location of the house resulting in limited to no ans ion opportunities on a nearly one acre proµ, y constitutes a practical difficulty with respect to making or changing the footpr' t. The variances are supported by practical difficulties and Staf approval of the vari ces as requested. 01nmission had no questions for Staff. Page 6 of 19