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 /> Leslie inquired how the topography of this lot could be used as a hardship. <br /> Gundlach stated when she reviewed the application, it appeared possible to relocate the addition 10 <br /> feet to the east. Gundlach stated a hardship inherent to the land that would prevent the addition from <br /> being relocated could be the topography of the lot,but that in her opinion the lot slopes very gradually <br /> and would allow for relocation of the addition. Gundlach noted she is unaware of the amount of <br /> grading that would be necessary if the addition were relocated and whether that would constitute a <br /> hardship. <br /> Leslie commented the fact that it might cost more to relocate the addition or is not architecturally <br /> pleasing does not constitute a hardship. <br /> Kempf inquired whether the ordinance that defines what the front and back yard of a lot is written in <br /> stone and if it is reviewed in every situation. <br /> Rahn stated since it is a city ordinance, it would require a variance to deviate from it. <br /> Gaffron stated it is in the definition section of the ordinance where it defines on a corner lot what the <br /> front yard is and what the side yard is. Gaffron stated the short side of a corner lot is the front <br /> according to the definition. <br /> Kempf inquired whether a variance could be applied for to make Cherry the front of the lot. <br /> Gaffron stated he is unaware of any application during his tenure that specifically requested a <br /> redefinition of the ordinance. Gaffron stated the opportunity to define a front yard and a side yard <br /> exists when someone requests a new subdivision,but to his recollection he is not aware of any <br /> variances to the ordinance in a situation similar to this. <br /> Leslie concurred that functionally the front of the house is located on Cherry. <br /> Gaffron inquired whether the Planning Commission would grant the variances if the front of the lot <br /> were considered Cherry. <br /> Leslie stated in his view the proposed addition could then be shifted back but does not really solve <br /> anything. <br /> Gundlach stated if the Planning Commission is interested in looking at making Cherry the front, the <br /> code may need to be amended rather than a variance granted. <br /> Bremer inquired whether the applicant is even interested in looking at redesigning her plans if <br /> Cherry would be considered the front of the property. Bremer stated the addition would merely be on <br /> a different side of the house. <br /> Simon stated her goals in this project are to add onto the house in a way that the house does not appear <br /> to be piece-mealed and to increase the amount of living space. Simon stated her in view redesigning <br /> PAGE 15 <br />