Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,January 22,2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#02-2742 Douglas and Roban Smith, Continued) <br /> 1983, a variance was granted to allow a 24' by 32' garage to be located 9.6 feet from the street property <br /> line instead of the required 35 feet. The addition would be on the south side of the building and would <br /> bring it to within approximately 25 feet of the residence. The garage addition increases the garage <br /> footprint to 24' by 44',making it an oversize accessory structure subject to greater setback restrictions. <br /> The Applicants are requesting variances to the average lakeshore setback to permit a 25-foot <br /> encroachment into the average lakeshore setback and to permit an oversized accessory structure to be <br /> located 9.6 feet from the street property line. <br /> Aandahl presented some photographs of the existing residence to the Planning Commission depicting <br /> the location of the proposed addition. Aandahl stated the Applicants are interested in making the <br /> kitchen larger,which was not remodeled at the time the other work in the house was done. The <br /> Applicants would like to upgrade the kitchen and make it larger to accommodate their family and <br /> friends. <br /> Aandahl stated the adjoining property owners' view of the lake would not be hampered by the proposed <br /> addition since there is quite a steep drop-off to the lake and would be located behind the deck. Aandahl <br /> indicated this residence is fairly blocked by a number of trees and the proposed addition should not <br /> affect their view at all. <br /> Aandahl showed pictures to the Planning Commission of the existing garage. <br /> Aandahl noted hardcover is not an issue, and during the process they took into consideration the impact <br /> to the neighbors as well as aesthetics and personal needs. <br /> Mr. Smith stated there is an existing three-car garage,but due to the fact they have a live-in nanny and <br /> three cars, along with a number of bicycles and other items requiring storage,they would like to <br /> construct a garage that would provide them with additional storage. Smith stated they did review their <br /> options for location of the garage,noting there are some issues with topography and a big oak tree that <br /> dictated the need for the garage to be located closer to the house. Smith stated the garage would also <br /> not impact the neighbors' view of the lake. <br /> Aandahl stated they also did look at the possibility of adding to the back of the garage,which did seem <br /> appear to be a good idea since the garage would still be located close to the street and would impact the <br /> neighbors more. Aandahl stated the topography of the land does not lend itself well to a third building, <br /> with three buildings not being aesthetically pleasing. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Hawn stated she does not see a problem with this application,but does not see a hardship imposed by <br /> this property that would prompt the need for a third oversized accessory building and the need to <br /> encroach on the setbacks. Hawn inquired whether the building could be reduced to 1,000 square feet <br /> versus the 1056 square feet. <br /> Mr. Smith stated the reason for the additional feet was to provide some storage. Smith indicated the <br /> building they are proposing is not tremendously large and they would like to avoid another shed. Smith <br /> PAGE 22 <br />