Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,April 18,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3103 Jack and Kari Olson,Continued) <br /> 1. A rear yard setback variance for a 7.5' rear setback where 15' is required; and <br /> 2. A hardcover variance for 48.9 percent within the 0-75' zone; and <br /> 3. A structural coverage variance for 32 percent or 1,799 square feet structure where 1,500 square <br /> feet is normally allowed and 23 percent currently exists; and <br /> 4. A principal building setback to allow a five-foot setback between the garage and the home where <br /> a 10-foot setback is normally required; and <br /> 5. A lake setback variance to construct a 22' by 24' detached garage within 75 feet of the lake. <br /> Curtis noted the applicants' entire property is located within 75 feet of the lake. The applicants are now <br /> proposing a 20' by 20' garage with some hardcover removals. Curtis stated due to the size and location <br /> of the property,there may be hardships to support a 20' by 20' garage. <br /> Jack Olson stated they initially proposed a 22' by 24' garage but came to the conclusion that that was <br /> unrealistic and revised their proposal. Olson stated their neighbor was allowed to construct a 20' by 20' <br /> foot garage and that his vehicle barely fits into that size of garage. <br /> Olson indicated they would like to construct a garage to accommodate their vehicles and that they are <br /> willing to remove some of the hardcover on the property. Olson stated they need a workable garage and <br /> that 20 feet is very tight and they would prefer a deeper garage. <br /> Mike Mischke, 1972 Shadywood Road, stated he is the neighbor that constructed the 20' by 20' garage <br /> and that he owns a very common vehicle, an F-150, short box. Mischke indicated it is a very tight fit and <br /> that he has not put any sheetrock on the walls because then he would not be able to fit his vehicle in the <br /> garage. Mischke indicated he would have pushed for a bigger garage had he known how little room he <br /> would have. <br /> Rahn noted Mischke was also pushing the 1500 square foot structural coverage. <br /> Mischke stated vehicles larger than his, such as an Escolade,would not fit into the garage. <br /> Rahn stated the larger issue is the structural coverage on the lot and the massing on the lots,which is a <br /> bigger issue on the smaller lots. Rahn stated to his recollection the Planning Commission has not granted <br /> variances to structural coverage. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the existing garage is a single car garage or a double car garage. Rahn commented <br /> that it appears there originally was a double car garage that had a portion converted into living space. <br /> Mischke stated the Olson's existing garage does not even accommodate a small car. <br /> PAGE 22 <br />