07-20-2015 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

15-3755 Nonconforming Structures Jaly 14,2015 Page 2 For example, (c)(3a)(1.) states that an expansion is allowed if it"does not increase the not�conformity". Absent more claritfication, it might be argued that, for example,placing a second story directly above an existing one-story building in which neither the existing building nar the proposed second story meet the required side setback, does not increase the nonconformity. However, this interpretation does not match the City's historical practice and policy, because the new second story,while no closer to the lot line than the existing building, now occupies a vertical space that formerly was encroachment-free, and may have impacts on the light, air and open space an adjacent neighboring property enjoys. Orono has long treated such expansions as a new encroachment that would not be allowed except by variance. A second example would be allowing a lateral addition to the first story at the sarne setback as the existing residence. For instance, consider an existing small house that is 5 feet from the side lot line where a 10-foot setback is required. The awner wants to increase the size of the house by building an addition to triple the length of the house along the lot line, at the same noncanfomung 5-foat setback as the existing house, under the premise that this is not increasing the encroachment; it's still a 5-foot encroachment on the 10-foot setback requirement. The City policy and practice has been to not allow such expanding encroachments except by vaziance, due to the potential negative impacts to the adjacent property by having a very Iong home very near the property boundary. The groposed additionallanguage defines what the City means by `expansion', defining its multi-dimensional character that the City has historically deemed to be a critical element. The new language also adds clarity to what is meant by "increase the nonconformity�'. The proposed language(drafted by the City Attorney at stafPs request)reflects how the City has consistently interpreted and enforced its nonconforming structure regulations in the past. Section 78-71(3) is proposed to be amended as follows. (3) Expansion of nonconforming structures. "Eapansipn of nonCqnformitt _str„4u,'#ttxes" includes any increase in a dimension, size a�a, v�lume or height• anv Qlacement vf a structure c�r part thereof�here none existed before• anY addition of a site feature such as �.deck, natio, f�nce, drivewav, t>arkins area,ar swimmingnool• �nv improvement that w-o 1 a1 ow�he 16�d�,b�,rr�o inten�e_�deve_lo�sed• az�d�v exte�ior stor��e,si�s,or li tin . No expansion of nonconforming structures shall be permitted except as specifically listed and allowed herein: a. Expansion of nonconforrrting single family residence structures. Lawful, nonconforming single family residential structures may be expanded,provided: 1. That the expansion does nat " ��upx�y �nace w�ithin a nc�-contormin�axea that was previousl}�not occupied eit.hsr irerticall r riT.ontal v, and complies with a11 height, setback, hardcover and lat coverage requirements of the district in which it is located.