01-22-03 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Wednesday,January 22, 2003 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2753 WESLEY BYRNE, Continued) Byrne indicated that the design with the 8' roofline as part of the plan has remained the same throughout the project. Had the Commission understood the raised roof at the time, Rahn believed this would have triggered the need for another variance. He questioned why there always seems to be the need for an after the fact variance with rebuilds. Hawn inquired whether the tight side-loading garage was ever considered to be a problem. Gaffron indicated that the driveway retaining wall would need to be 5' from the lot line for maneuvering in and out of the garage and driveway. Kelly Wolvey, 2815 Casco Point Road, stated that she and her family moved in last April and have no concerns or issues with the addition. She added that they were happy to see Byrne improve his property and did not have concerns that it fell 4' from the property line. As this was unintentional on Mr. Byrne or the City's part, her only concern was, if Mr. Byrne were forced to redo his plans,the home would have little character and be extremely long to fit on the lot in order to meet setbacks. Fritzler also viewed the home as a total rebuild and asked what would be required if the applicant were forced to go back to square one. While Hawn concurred, she empathized with the applicant's unintentional error. Mabusth pointed out that staff and building inspectors had looked at the project all along with him. She felt the City was a bit remiss,now after many months into construction, only revisiting the topic now. Byrne acknowledged he is seven months into construction,of which now he is delayed and will be costly to him. Whether or not the foundation needs to be repaired or rebuilt, Rahn questioned if the applicant could maintain the original 5' wall height versus the proposed 8' wall. Since the City is constantly dealing with massing issues,he believed holding the construction to what it was originally could be an acceptable compromise. If the applicant were denied the variance, Zugschwert asked what he would have to do next. Byrne stated that, as he understood it, he would have to remove 4' from his first floor and lift up the porch room over the basement. Gaffron added that, as well as,redesigning the baths, stairways, etc. As blame existed on both sides,Hannaford found it difficult to force the applicant to redesign his whole plan due to misunderstandings. Hawn concurred with Rahn to keep the knee wall at 5' versus 8'. Gaffron drew a jog on the overhead to reflect the revised setback and wall height. PAGE 6 of 29