Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,July 15,2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#02-2791 DAVID AND JODI RAHN, Continued) <br /> possessing two proposed garages. She asked why no garage had been considered in 1997. <br /> Rahn maintained that the original design would have been different from the start, if he had not <br /> been limited by the floodplain. He likely would have proposed an attached garage. Rahn stated <br /> that based on these issues at the outset, they were not in any hurry to construct a garage, nor did <br /> they have any idea where it might fit best, later on they built the detached garage. <br /> Rahn reiterated that if they remove the steps, walkway and driveway to the existing garage, they <br /> lose 160' in hardcover. He did request keeping a landing and 3' apron along the garage for water <br /> diversion. <br /> Smith asked if the removal of the steps, driveway, and walkway were reflected in the <br /> calculations. <br /> Weinberger noted that they had been taken into account. <br /> Present during both 1997 and 1998, Hawn stated that this lot could support no more hardcover, <br /> however, based on the redefinition of the floodplain, she has since reconsidered her position. The <br /> structural coverage issue has been eliminated, the rest of the new construction falls within the 75- <br /> 250' setback with hardcover not exceeding 25%, under these circumstances she indicated that <br /> she could approve the application. Hawn added that she would never like to see this property <br /> come before the Commission ever again. <br /> Rahn stated that he wasn't aware there were limits on the number of variances a property is <br /> granted. He pointed out that neighbors have been granted 31%hardcover variances in the area, <br /> whereas, he has only a 23%hardcover ratio. <br /> Mabusth stated that she concurred with Hawn's opinion. <br /> Smith took a moment to caution others not to be in too great a hurry to develop property without <br /> examining all of their options. Had the applicant resolved the floodplain issue at the time, he <br /> would not be here this evening, the Commission would not be looking at three structures, he <br /> could have had his attached garage as proposed, and pulled back the home a little bit to enjoy <br /> more of the lakeshore, but here we are. <br /> Mabusth supported the application, adding that the applicant has and will have to live with the <br /> imposed limitations. He could have enjoyed more home and lakeshore if these issues had been <br /> resolved upfront. <br /> PAGE 4 of 36 <br />