Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE � <br /> ORONO PLANNTNG COMI�ZISSION <br /> Monday,July 17,2006 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#06-3221 Sean and Nicolie Wheeler Hendrickson,Continued) <br /> Jeffries stated the one-foot cantilever impacts the size of the second floor of the structure and is not just a <br /> decorative overhang. <br /> Turner stated the code is very clear that the cantilever would count as structural coverage. The concern <br /> that Staff has is whether a hardship exists to grant a siructural coverage variance. <br /> Bremer iriquired whether on another application with new construction a property owner was granted a <br /> structural coverage limit. ' <br /> Gaffron stated he does not recall an instance on new construction where a structural coverage variance <br /> was granted. Gaffron stated there was one instance on a remodel with a lot that was much less than <br /> 10,000 square feet where they were granted a variance. <br /> Curtis stated in that instance there was an existing home and no garage. <br /> Bremer stated that house had been remodeled and the garage converted into living space and the new <br /> owners wanted a garage. <br /> Gaffron stated the question is whether 1500 square feet is a reasonable number for this lot, and if a bigger <br /> number is supported by hardships,then perhaps the Planning Commission could recommend that <br /> something more than 1500 would be allowed. Gaffron stated the orientation of the house is driving some <br /> variance. Gaffron noted the house is located five feet from the property line and that the house could be <br /> reoriented to get the majority of the driveway further away from the property line. Gaffron stated the <br /> character of the neighborhood and the curb appeal should be considered when considering the variances. <br /> Jurgens stated that he is not in favor of the structural lot coverage variance. Jurgens noted this is a slab on <br /> grade without a basement and inquired whether there is a water table:problem in this area, <br /> Hendrickson stated they only have six feet from road grade and that he was unsure whether they could do <br /> a basement. . <br /> Jurgens stated the structural coverage could be reduced with a different design and suggested that the <br /> � applicant consider some revisions to their design. Jurgens stated he would be in favor of tabling the <br /> application. <br /> Bremer recommended the applicants redesign their plans to eliminate as many of the variances as possible <br /> and to consider adding a basement. <br /> Berg stated relocating the driveway off of the property line is also another issue that should be addressed. <br /> Jurgens stated a front loading garage would be one option. <br /> PAGE 37 <br />