09-16-2002 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, September 16, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#5) #02-2822 DANIELLE HENELY, 3422 LIVINGSTON AVENUE, VARIANCE, 7:31 p.m. - 8:06 p.m. Danielle Henely, Applicant, was present. Bottenberg reported that the applicant has requested variances to permit a detached garage to be located between the principal structure and the street. The proposed residence meets all setbacks in the LR-1B zoning district, as well as, structural and hardcover coverage requirements of city ordinances. A conditional use permit is required because this lot is considered a"through" lot, whereas both street lines shall be front lines for applying the Zoning Chapter. Bottenberg explained that, since the original application, the applicant agreed to move the detached garage 10' from the side property, thus, eliminating the need for side yard setback and crowding principal structure variances. By downsizing the detached garage to 20'X24', the applicant would no longer need a hardcover variance in the 500-1000' setback zone. Bottenberg indicated that staff would recommend approval of the variance and conditional use permit to construct a detached garage on the property if the garage were located 10' from the side property line and reduced to 20'X15', and the deck reduced to 14'X10' to meet yard setbacks. Henely pointed out that she would be willing to alter the deck size to bring it under 6' and remove it from the structural coverage equation. She stated that it was important to her to construct a two car garage and intended to design a 20'X22' structure. This would bring the total structural coverage to 1496' s.f.,just below the 1500' allowed. Rahn believed that the original deck was built without a permit and asked if it was encroaching or in compliance currently. He suggested shaving a corner of the deck near County Road 19 to better meet zoning standards. Henely indicated that she would be willing to shave off a corner of her deck to meet the setback and use landscaping to correct erosion problems near the deck.. Gaffron pointed out that a deck without a railing needs to be 30' from County Road 19, and asked if the Planning Commission was comfortable with a retaining wall near the County Road. Not knowing where the original dirt was, Fritzler suggested the applicant lower the deck and bring in the corner versus raising the grade to meet the deck. Henely stated that she would prefer to comply, lowering the deck and using a retaining wall. Gaffron reminded the applicant, and her landscaper, that any proposed grading or fill with a steeper slope than 3:1 would likely force the Commission to reconsider. PAGE 8