05-21-2012 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

NIINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING O O Monday,Aprit 16,2012 � 6:30 o'clock p.m. � .,l/ Anderson commented the Planning Commission does not appear to be at a point where further direction V can be given. Anderson stated he has worked with the City for the past 25 years and that he maintains a legal,well-maintained operation. ' � Schoenzeit sta.ted the City appreciates the comments and participation of Mr.Anderson on this item: Schoenzeit moved,Lesldnen seconded,to table Application#11-3503,City of Orono,Zoning Code Text Amendment—Lakeshore Residential Zoning Districts: Dock Rental. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS � 3. #12- 49 MARGARET PELTOLA, 1550 NORTH ARM DRIVE TER-THE-FACT VARIANCES, :08 P.M. •,�� Margazet Peltola,A licant,was present. ��• Gaffron stated the appli nt is requesting an after-the-fact front s ack variance for the construction of an enclosed entryway an overed deck. The existing home,c structed in approximately 1930,is a one- � story walkout rambler with one-sta.11 detached garage. Ove the winter the applicant,with the assistance of a friend,began construction f an enclosed 6'x 6'en ay and a 6'x 6'adjacent deck without the required building permits. Revi of a 1999 survey on e indicated the partially finished structure was located less than the required 35-f t setback from th ont lot line.The applicant has provided an updated survey and is requesting var ce approval ' order to complete the structure as proposed. The proposed enclosed entryway as con cte is 34.4 feet from the street lot line and the covered deck e�ctending from it is 28.4 feet from the fron t line. The LR 1B zoning district requires a 35-foot front or street yard setback. No other variances ar r uired for this addition. With the enclosed entryway door faci g the stree an entry porch or stoop encroaching into the setback is necessary for reasonable access du o the height o he main floor. If the enhy door was relocated to the side of the enclosed entryway, a oop could likely be onstructed that would not require a variance. Covering that side entry stoop ight impact views from e front windows and would reduce light into those windows. The applicant has indicat d to Staff that the interior of the enc sed entryway is too small to allow for large furniture,etc.,to ake the turn so that a straight-through c figuration was constructed. Additionally the appl' ant has indicated that a south facing door porch would conflict with existing utilities. The appli t also noted that the covered porch is intende o protect visitors from the rain, etc., as the house has mimal overhangs. A factor in co sidering practical di�culty is whether the request is in kee ' g with the character of the neighborhoo and adjacent properties. The Planning Commission should de rmine if the requested setback v ance will alter the essential character of the locality. The applican ' proposing an addition that will tend 12' closer to the road than the west wall of the home,which is 3 , ercent from the street 1 line. Because the residence is slightly angled back from the street,the neare t point of the enclo d entryway will be 34.4 feet from the street lot line or just 0.06 feet closer than allowed. However,the addition of the covered deck/porch is the primary cause of the need for a variance. Page 6