Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 17,2015 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Gaffron pointed out the portion of the house that is currently one-story and illustrated the area that would <br /> be squared off to make it two stories. Gaffron stated the garage would be a little bit taller than what <br /> currently is there. <br /> Bonnett asked if the hardcover is going to double. <br /> Gaffron stated hardcover is not an issue since this is not a hardcover zone and applicants are not limited to <br /> a specific hardcover level on the property. <br /> Landgraver stated from a Planning Commission perspective,there are concerns from the neighbors that <br /> this is out of character with the neighborhood and that the Planning Commission can either approve, <br /> deny, or table. Landgraver stated he appreciates the neighbors' concerns about the massing and clarifying <br /> that it is not just the second story but the fact that it is going sideways rather than backwards. Landgraver <br /> stated the Planning Commission is not here to design homes and that in his view there is not a basis to <br /> deny it. <br /> Lemke stated there are other opportunities to construct and they did not take advantage of them. Lemke <br /> stated both neighbors are in opposition to the addition and that he is not very excited about it and would <br /> deny it. <br /> Leskinen noted the actual garage addition is not any bigger than the existing garage except that it is <br /> moving forward a little. Leskinen stated she does not have a compelling reason to deny that. As far as <br /> the addition going up, Leskinen stated she would agree there are places to go in the back but that the <br /> applicants are utilizing the existing footprint, which the City has seen a number of times. <br /> Lemke asked what the advantage is for using the existing footprint. <br /> Berg stated that is up to the homeowner to decide, and if they do not want to add on to the back of their <br /> house,the Planning Commission should not say they cannot add a second floor and require them to build <br /> to the back. Berg stated she personally would not do that since the Planning Commission would be <br /> designing it for them. Berg stated the Planning Commission just needs to look at whether the proposal <br /> can be approved or not. <br /> Thiesse asked if there are any variances required. <br /> Gaffron indicated the addition would require front yard and side yard setback variances. Gaffron noted <br /> the City just passed an ordinance that clarified what the past practice has been regarding expansion of <br /> nonconformities. <br /> Thiesse stated he is struggling with the application since there are a lot of other options they could do but <br /> didn't. Thiesse stated he would be all in favor of it if the neighbors were in support of it. <br /> Schwingler stated he respects what the neighbors have to say but that the Planning Commission is not <br /> here to design it but rather to vote on what is in front of them. <br /> Berg stated the neighbors do not want the second story. <br /> Page 23 of 43 <br />