P.C. minutes-5-19-2014/variance application

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, May 19,2014 6:30 dclock p.m. Gaffron stated one of the concerns is that the foundation was originally constructed in 1981 and may not support a second story. The applicant has been asked to provide certification from a structural engineer that the foundation will support a second story but that information has yet to be submitted. The applicant has indicated they have removed a small shed from the property and at this time do not plan to remove the garage, patio, deck, or driveway. The garage, deck, and driveway appear to constitute legal nonconforming hardcover and/or structure. [n other similar situations,the City has encouraged the owners to consider building tuck-under garages and removing the lengthy driveways and backyard detached garages that are near the creek. [n this case, the existing home is barely larger than a typical tuck-under garage and the second story addition may be more appropriate than a total tear-down/rebuild that likely would result in a larger footprint. Gaffron stated one of the issues involved in this situation is that the survey indicates the neighboring home to the immediate west is encroaching on the applicants' property by as much as 1.7 feet. Gaffron noted the property owner across the road to the north has submitted comments in opposition to the variances that is included in the Planning Commission's packets. The neighbor has expressed concerns regarding the house being too close to the power lines and the impacts a second story blocking their lake view. Gaffron noted City Code does not protect the views of that neighbor. Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed setback variances for addition of a second story on the basis that hardcover and structural lot coverage will not increase,the second story will maintain the existing first story setbacks, and the proposed addition will not be out of character with other homes in the neighborhood. Schoenzeit asked if this house has an average lakeshore setback. Gaffron indicated it does and that it meets the average lakeshore setback. The detached garage does not meet the average lakeshore setback. Thiesse asked if it should be conforming. Gaffron stated since it is existing, it is not an issue for consideration. Schoenzeit stated the issue is whether the second story encroaches into the average lakeshore setback and impacts the neighbors' views, which it does not appear to do. Gaffron recommended the Planning Commission discuss the issues for consideration outlined in Staff's report. Gaffron stated any approval should be subject to the following conditions: �� 1. Prior to Council review,the applicants shall provide a corrected survey showing the correct lot dimensions and showing the accurately depicted average lakeshore setback line. The applicant should also provide corrected hardcover calculations to confirm to Staffls calculations. 2. The approval is based on the preliminary floor plans and elevation view submitted, which depict a second-story home of approximately 26 feet in peak height. Gaffron noted the existing garage floor is at the 931.5 floodplain elevation and the main floor of the house is at 933.5, which is two Page 25 of 31