Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> • <br /> Tuesday,February 22,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3084 James and Patricia Olson, Continued) <br /> however,recommend approval of a front yard setback variance of 77 feet,which would not increase the <br /> existing non-conforming front yard setback. Gundlach noted the applicant would have to redesign the <br /> garage to achieve a 77 feet setback. <br /> Mr. Olson indicated in discussions with his builder and other contractors that the recommended option <br /> was to construct the garage in this manner and that there are potential water damage issues if the design <br /> is changed. <br /> Kempf inquired whether it was recommended to relocate the windows. <br /> Olson indicated that was the recommendation. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the garage is 30 feet front to back. <br /> Olson stated it is. <br /> Rahn questioned whether the length of the garage could be shortened. Rahn stated he is unsure where <br /> the peak lines up with the windows but that in his opinion there are a number of options that the <br /> applicant has. Rahn noted the Planning Commission has consistently not allowed further <br /> encroachments. Rahn reiterated in his view it could be redesigned. <br /> Leslie commented the garage could be angled. <br /> Olson stated the rationale for going the direction they are proposing is to avoid the need to remove three <br /> large pine trees. <br /> Rahn asked for public comment on this application. <br /> There were no public comments. <br /> Kempf stated it is unlikely that the Planning Commission would allow continued encroachment and that <br /> there are a number of options that the applicant could consider for this project. Kempf stated in his view <br /> it does not appear likely that the Planning Commission would allow the garage to be constructed toward <br /> the street any further than the existing setback. <br /> Olson inquired whether a 24 by 24' garage would be an option. <br /> Leslie stated in his opinion there are a number of options the applicant could employ without further <br /> encroaching into the setback. <br /> Olson indicated the house met the setbacks at the time it was constructed and questioned whether there <br /> is any grandfathering allowed. <br /> PAGE 10 <br />