Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,Apri116,2012 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> The 6'x 6'enclosed entryway extending from the pre-existing front door could be accomplished with <br /> minimal or no variance to the front setback. However,granting of a variance to allow an additional six <br /> feet of structure encroachment to accommodate the covered porch may not be necessary to preserve the <br /> applicant's ability to reasonably access the home in an energy-efficient manner. The applicant has <br /> indicated the porch and entryway are necessary for future accommodation of wheelchair access to the <br /> house. The Planning Commission should consider whether such access could be reasonably <br /> accomplished with a side-loading entryway and a covered porch directly south of the entryway, <br /> substantially meeting the applicant's goals but minimizing the level of variance needed. <br /> The conditions applying to this property are somewhat unique in that existing structures on adjacent <br /> properties are not uniformly set back from the road. The adjacent home to the north has a detached <br /> garage located in the front yard approximately 25 feet from its front lot line. The applicant's entryway <br /> and covered porch will extend no closer to the road than that neighboring garage. The residence to the , <br /> immediate south is located approximately 34 feet from the street lot line. The applicant's house sits four <br /> to six feet above the street and the entryway and porch will be somewhat screened from public view by <br /> existing vegetation. The Planning Commission should consider whether the proposed entryway addition <br /> will be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood or have any negative impacts on light,air,or <br /> open space in the neighborhood. <br /> The Planning Commission should consider the following issues: <br /> 1. Does the Planning Commission find that the applicant proposes to use the subject property in a <br /> reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variances, if granted,will not alter the essential <br /> character of the neighborhood? <br /> 3. Is the requested setback variance supported by practical difficulties? Can the proposed entryway <br /> and porch be reconfigured to minimize the extent of setback variance required? <br /> Staff recommends approval of the minimal(0.06') setback variance required for the enclosed entryway. <br /> With regards to the covered porch, Staff recommends the Planning Commission review with the applicant <br /> whether the covered porch can be reasonably reoriented to the side of the entryway and still meet the <br /> applicant's needs. If so, Staff would recommend that the additional6'variance to accommodate the <br /> westerly extended porch be denied and the applicant be provided direction as to providing an alternative <br /> plan. <br /> Schoenzeit asked if the applicant obtained a building permit and whether the building is structurally <br /> sound and meets City code. <br /> Gaffron indicated it is his understanding the building inspector has not reviewed the structure or the plans <br /> and that no permit has been obtained. <br /> Schoenzeit stated it appears to be structurally sound from the sketch. <br /> Gaffron stated that would be subject to the building inspector's verification. <br /> Page 7 <br />