Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 16, 2004 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#04-3044 Jennifer Simon, Continued) <br /> Kempf stated in his opinion the biggest issue is that Cherry is not the front of the lot, and that if <br /> Cherry were the front of the lot, then the side yard setback would be 10 feet. Kempf stated in his view <br /> the backyard is functionally a back yard and what the applicant is calling the side of the house is <br /> functionally a side yard. Kempf stated he cannot see imposing the City's definition for front yard/side <br /> yard on this application. <br /> Fritzler inquired whether the applicant was unable to locate the addition because of conditions due to <br /> the land. Fritzler stated the location of an existing window does not constitute a hardship and is a <br /> design issue. <br /> Simon concurred that it is a design issue,but reiterated they were unaware of the side yard setback <br /> until they were well into this project. Simon stated the entire project would have to be redesigned if <br /> the variances are not granted and that she has considerable expense already into the project. Simon <br /> commented she may have to forego the project if the variances are not approved. <br /> Fritzler indicated he tends to agree with Staff's recommendation. <br /> Rahn stated he also is in agreement with Staff's recommendation, and explained that there is some <br /> rationale for determining a corner lot. Rahn stated the longer setbacks are on the front and rear of the <br /> property and narrower on the sides, so it would make sense to have your larger setbacks go with the <br /> length of the lot. <br /> Simon stated she is limited in what she can do with the house given the location of it on the lot. <br /> Rahn noted the lot is somewhat rectangular. <br /> Simon noted she is also reducing the amount of hardcover by removing the patio and porch,which <br /> makes the lot well over its hardcover limit. Simon stated this addition would actually bring the lot <br /> more into compliance with the hardcover requirements. <br /> Rahn commented in his view the addition could be relocated 10 feet over,but that it would be up to <br /> the applicant to decide whether she wants to move the addition. <br /> Gundlach stated even if Cherry were considered the front, a variance would still be required to do the <br /> covered entryway and the tuck-under garage addition. Gundlach stated the existing house does not <br /> meet the 30 foot required setback if Cherry is considered the front. <br /> Simon commented in her view the side of the house with the covered entryway is the front of the <br /> house. <br /> Gundlach explained the City's code considers Minnie Avenue the front because it is the shortest <br /> length. <br /> Simon stated in her opinion a variance would be required no matter where she builds onto the house <br /> given the fact that the house was originally constructed in the corner of the lot. <br /> PAGE 14 <br />