Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,July 16,2001 <br /> (#01-2691 J. Eric and Christine Menge,Continued) <br /> Smith asked about adding on to the back of the house,which might help limit the size of the <br /> proposed garage addition and the neighbor's concerns. She thought the garage may not need to be <br /> converted to living space if more were added to the back. The architects indicated there were fairly <br /> steep slopes to the back of the house limiting the building area. <br /> Stoddard commented that it is important to be cognizant of side setbacks and neighbor's views. He <br /> thought if the garage were not angled,there would be a 25' setback and possibly more living space <br /> behind the garage. Blumentritt responded that by angling the garage, more open area is gained with <br /> only a corner closer to the neighbor. <br /> Lindquist noted there were two setbacks,the front and side yard setbacks. The side yard setback is <br /> proposed at 12'. The neighbor to the other side has a setback of approximately 31'. Lindquist stated <br /> he would look at a minimum of a 30' side setback for each neighbor and the applicant would need to <br /> stay within those setbacks in his design. <br /> Hawn agreed with Lindquist noting that a 50' setback is required. A setback proposal at 12.7' <br /> requires a variance which is too great. <br /> Menge asked what the required setbacks are for a one or two acre zone. Gaffron responded that the <br /> one acre zone requires 35' front and rear with 10' on the sides, and the two acre zone is 50' front and <br /> rear with 30' on the sides. Menge noted that his lot is a one acre lot and next door is 2 '/2. Hawn <br /> commented that his request is a radical departure from the zoning standards. <br /> Smith commented that she had the same concerns as Hawn and Lindquist. <br /> Stoddard stated that he may be a little more lenient and may allow up to 25' for the side setbacks. <br /> Mabusth stated that she had the same concerns and suggested tabling the application with some <br /> direction to the applicants. None of the Commissioners were concerned with the front or rear <br /> setbacks. The side setback is the major issue, especially with the concerns expressed by the neighbor <br /> to the north. <br /> Hawn commented that tipping the garage may help some but was concerned with the impact of <br /> headlights on the neighbors. <br /> Mabusth commented that using portions of the existing garage to enlarge the garage area would be a <br /> good option to pursue. <br /> Blumentritt responded that they had looked at those options. The current entry is not safe and using <br /> the existing garage as an entryway makes sense with the rest of the layout. <br /> Fritzler stated that in redesigning a structure on the existing property,the goal would be not to <br /> encroach on the side setbacks any more than necessary. He also suggested shortening the 2 '/2 car <br /> garage but going deeper to the back of the property so the same square footage would be involved in <br /> the additions. <br /> PAGE 5 <br />