Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, November 17, 2003 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#12) #03-2962 ROBERT AND JOANNE SWITZ, 1740 SHADYWOOD ROAD, <br /> VARIANCE, Continued <br /> doing this, a standard lot area variance and a hardcover and structural coverage variance <br /> are still required to construct the proposed home. <br /> Since the applicants have met with staff to discuss their proposal and what the City <br /> consistently requires with rebuild situations, the applicants are aware that the hardcover <br /> and structural coverage proposals are excessive to what has been consistently approved <br /> with rebuild situations but have decided to move forward without any re-design. <br /> Waataja reported that, currently, a home exists within both the 0-75' zone and the 75-250' <br /> zone. The applicants are proposing to tear down this structure and rebuild a new home <br /> with a 3,895 s.f. footprint entirely within the 75-250' zone. The applicants have also <br /> agreed to remove the boathouse near the shoreline, therefore no variance is required for the <br /> 0-75' zone. However, the applicant is proposing a 3,895 s.f. footprint home, 72 s.f. of <br /> walk, and 1,060 s.f. of driveway in the 75-250' zone which puts the hardcover for the zone <br /> at 44% requiring a variance. The proposed house footprint puts the lot at 19% structural <br /> coverage when 15% is allowed thus requiring a variance. The existing house meets the <br /> 15% structural coverage limit. <br /> Waataja explained that staff finds no viable hardships to approve the hardcover and <br /> structural coverage variances as proposed. Staff would consider supporting a hardcover <br /> variance due to the shallowness of the lot and the need for a driveway turn-around <br /> however, not the proposed 44%. This 44% also doesn't include any decking or patio and <br /> staff feels that the 44% has the potential to get even larger in the future. Staff has advised <br /> the applicants to re-work their proposal to allow for a minimal driveway, front walk and <br /> some decking or patio. The applicants have been advised that staff is not entirely opposed <br /> to a hardcover variance however the proposal needs to be re-worked to a hardcover <br /> percentage much less than the proposed 44%. <br /> The applicants are also proposing a variance to allow 19% structural coverage. Staff <br /> advised the applicants that variances to this requirement are hardly ever granted on rebuild <br /> situations. Staff will hold to this suggestion as new homes have consistently been held to <br /> 15%. No hardship exists to allow structural coverage in excess of 15% due to the <br /> allowable building pad of 3,093 square feet. <br /> In conclusion Waataj a stated that staff recommends the following: <br /> 1. Approval of the lot area variance to allow a rebuild on a lot which is 0.47 acres in <br /> size when 0.50 acres is normally allowed. <br /> 2. Denial of the lot coverage by structures variance to allow 19% structural coverage <br /> when 15% is normally allowed. <br /> PAGE 31 of 41 <br />