05-20-2013 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

+ FILE#13-3603 15 May 2013 Page 3 of 4 not constructed as such and is 6.8 feet from the front and 9.5 feet from the side making it non- conforming.Approval of the requested variance to connect the detached garage to the house would make the (now conforming) principal structure non-conforming with respect to the front . and side yard setbacks. The garage roof changes will result in a further encroachment into the required 10-foot side yard setback for the%foot at the north corner of the garage and a slight change in the encroachment on the front. The garage is situated at an angle so that only a small portion, a corner, encroaches into the side setback. Practical Difficulties Statement Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. � Practical Difficulties Analysis In considering applications for variance, the P/anning Commission shall consider the effect of ti►e proposed variance upon the hea/th, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated tra�c conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The P/anning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the litera/ provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practica/ di�cu/ties because of circumstances unigue to the individua/ property under consideration, and shall recommend approva/on/y when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff visited the site and took a number of photos to document how the garage was located with respect to the road, the vegetation and the topography of the site. While the garage is only set back 6.8' from the front property line, Casco Point Road is not centered within the ROW which results in a 34 foot setback from the paved roadway. The applicants are proposing to rotate the orientation of the roof and to raise the peak of the roof 10 feet higher than existing. As proposed, the neighboring property owner will see a garage wall and gable end of the garage roof as opposed to the garage wall and portions of roof as they do today (see attached photos). It is unclear from the plans if the applicants are planning windows or other architectural features in the north-facing gable. There does not appear to be adequate space to install trees or other screening, at least at the northern corner, to minimize the views of the garage. The south-facing gable has a vent at the peak. Inclusion of architectural features or windows along the north wall may break up a monotonous view from the adjacent property. There is space available to screen the proposed addition connecting the home and detached garage from the neighboring property. If this were a lakeshore lot a detached garage would be permitted generally in the location of the existing garage. Variances were granted in 1978 to allow the current location of the detached garage between the house and the street. The existing home on the property currently conforms to the required setbacks set forth in the LR-1C district; approving the requested variances will make the home's location non-conforming. If, in the future, the property owner wishes to replace the existing home in-kind the location of the existing home would be considered a legal in-kind rebuild. The proposed connection addition will be most visible from the driveway of the adjacent property to the north; it will be only minimally visible from the road.