Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,January 22,2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#7) #02-2738 G& G HOLDING COMPANY LTD.,PARTNERSHIP, 1170 LOMA LINDA <br /> AVENUE,AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES,7:49 p.m.—7:56 p.m. <br /> Scott Kutz,Vintage Builders, was present. <br /> Bottenberg stated the Applicants are requesting after-the-fact variances to replace a lakeside porch to the <br /> same footprint that existed. The porch was built in 1978 and the wood is rotting on the roof. A permit <br /> was obtained from the City, and during the process of the maintenance work and roof repair it was <br /> discovered that the floor of the porch was also rotten. <br /> In 1978 a variance was granted to enclose an existing concrete patio on the lakeside of the residence that <br /> encroached into the 75' lakeshore setback and into the side yard setback. The plan approved is the same <br /> as what is being proposed today. The footprint,hardcover,roof height or lot coverage by structures is <br /> not changing from what existed and was approved in 1978. <br /> A variance to the side yard setback is required to allow the porch to be 2.7 feet from the side lot line <br /> where 10 feet is required, and a variance to the average lakeshore setback is also required to permit an <br /> encroachment of 67 feet. Variances to hardcover in the 0-75' and 75-250' setback are also needed as <br /> well as a variance to the lakeshore setback to allow a portion of the residence footprint to be within 75' <br /> of the lakeshore. <br /> Kutz stated they are not changing the footprint at all. Kutz stated he was unaware that correcting an <br /> unsafe condition in the porch would require a variance since the footprint of the building was not being <br /> changed. Kutz stated they did stop work on the porch until approval is received on the variances. <br /> Bill Bockman, 830 Loma Linda Road, stated he just had a question regarding why after-the-fact <br /> variances were needed,noting that it sounds like they were doing something they weren't supposed to <br /> be doing and then got caught. <br /> Hawn inquired whether Bockman heard the explanation of the builder. <br /> Bockman stated he did. <br /> Hawn inquired whether the neighbor has had a problem with the porch in the past. <br /> Bockman stated he does not. <br /> There were no further public comments regarding this application. <br /> Mabusth stated she does not have a problem with this application since they are not expanding the <br /> building envelope. <br /> Kluth moved,Hawn seconded,to recommend approval of Application#02-2738, <br /> G& G Holding Company Ltd.Partnership, 1170 Loma Linda Avenue,granting of after-the-fact <br /> variances for side yard setback, average lakeshore setback,hardcover in the 0-75' setback, <br /> hardcover in the 75-250' setback, and lakeshore setback to permit the enclosure of an existing <br /> concrete patio on the lakeside of the residence. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. <br /> PAGE 13 <br />