11-21-2005 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF TFIE y ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,October 17, 2005 6:00 dclock p.m. (#05-3152 Bohland Development, Continued) Gaffi-on recommended the Planning Commission make a motion requesting that the Cotmcil review this application conceptually for PRD and clustering concept. Rahn moved,Kempf secondecl,to table Application#05-3152,Bohlanct Development on behalf of James D.Mackinnon, et al, "3500"Watertown Road,to allow for council review of tlie plan to deterinine if it meets tlie standards of tl�e Rural Oasis Plan. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS 4. #OS-3142 CA1tISTOPAER AND EMILY CFIAPMAN,3775 BAYSIDE ROAD, VARIANCE, 7:18 P.M.—7:39 P.M. Emily Chapn�an, Applicant, was present. Gundlach stated the applicant is requesting two variances in order to construct a 12' by 12' shed on the property east of the existing garage. A hardcover variance is being requested to permit hardcover within the 0-250' zone of 30 percent where 0 percent hardcover in the 0-75' zone and 25 percent in the 75'-250' zone are noinlally required and 30 percent in the 0-250' zone was approved by variance in June of 2004. I�i addition,the applicant is also requesting a sheebrear yard setback variance to permit the proposed shed to be located 21 feet from the property line where 50 feet is normally required and the existing home was permitted to be set back 21 feet from the property line by variance. Gundlach noted the property had received variances for the required sh-eet(rear)yard setback, lake setback, and hardcover in June of 2004. The property is unique in that its area is quite large due to the length of shoreline; however, is very shailow where the required street or rear yard setback overlaps with the required 75-foot lake setback. At the time the 2004 variances were approved,the applicant,who was the builder and not the cuirent owner,requested to rebuild on the existing foot�rint, which was approved as no coinpliant buildable area existed on the property. The applicant had indicated that they would like to remove non-structi,iral hardcover, like the sidewalk and driveway, in an effort to obtain approval of the consh-uction of a shed to store lawn equipment and other items. While no elevation views of the proposed shed have Ueen submitted, the applicanis have indicated the shed will be consiructed of inaterials consistent with the architecti.�ral style of the home. The applicants have proposed to remove 147.5 square feet of non-structural hardcover in order to Ue permitted a shed. This would result in a net decrease in the hardcover of approximately 3.5 se�uare feet. Staff fnds that the property is unique due to the overlapping streei and lake setback requirements with the additional wetland resh•ietions. Those hardships are documented in Resolution 5198 approved in 2004. The proposal meets the ititent of the code,Ueing that no increase in hardcover is proposed, the shed is not located closer to the street than the existing house, the lake setUack is met, as well as wetland and side PAGE 11