Laserfiche WebLink
NIINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COAZNIISSIQN MEETING n <br /> Tuesday,Janaary 19,2016 < �> <br /> 6:30 o'cicek p,�►. �� � <br /> �� <br /> building will require a vaziance as it will exceed 1,000 square feet for this 1.3 acre lot. That section also �� �°'� <br /> ��� <br /> limits the ptoperiy to no znore than 2,000 square feet of total accessory structures. Bec�use there is an <br /> additional existing 819 square foot detached garage on the pmperty,the added cflvered deck will bring the <br /> total accessory structure square footage for the pmpe�rty to 2,081 square feet,requiring an additional <br /> variance. <br /> Gaffran stated it is uncommon that the City would approve variances to create an oversize accessory <br /> structure by expanding au existing accessory structure, especialiy when the existing building is <br /> nonconformiu�g in location and t]ie lot is substandard in size. The existing structure comes nowhore near <br /> meating the principal structute set�acks required for an oversized accessory structure and its proposed <br /> footprint would require a lot of at least three acres in area. <br /> The existing accessory building was administratively approved far installation of a#oilet and sink in 2010 <br /> aitd the owners executed the required covenants limiting the uses of the building. An aspect of that <br /> a�aproval was installation of a sewage ejector system directly behind the building which pumps to the <br /> house sewer system. The ejector tank was required to be located ten feet from the back of the builcEing. <br /> However,the proposed cavered porch encroaches over an edge of that tank,poten�ially making future <br /> maintenance of the ejector system more difficul� If the addition is constructed,t�ie property owner <br /> should be required to relocate the tank to meet the required 10-foot setback. <br /> Gaf&on stateci this lot is technicaJly a through lot because it has frontage on Spates Avenue and backs up <br /> to undeveloped Grand Avenue,requiring accessory structures to m�eet principal structure setbacks. In <br /> a.ddition,the addition constitutes expansion of a non-conforming structure and does nat meet the zoning <br /> code ctiteria far such an expansion. <br /> If the Planning Commission determines that the practical difficulties test is met and the variances are <br /> justified,then a recomtnendation for approval may be in order. If the Planning Connznission finds that the <br /> practical diffieulties test is not met,a recommendation for denial, or tabling for revisions,may be <br /> appropriate. <br /> No comments have been received from the neighbors. <br /> Page 9 of 45 <br />