06-17-2013 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, May 20, 2013 6:30 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 25 In 1994, a variance was granted to allow construction of the existing hoe 30 feet from the rear lot line where a 50-foot setback is required. A door was constructed on the south side of the upper level which was required by building code to be blocked off for safety reasons. In 2012, a permit was issued to allow a minimal landing and stair for egress at this door location. The current property owners are requesting a setback variance in order to construct a 14’ x 14’ deck (plus stair) in this location, 30 feet from the rear lot line where a 50-foot setback is required and a 30-foot setback currently exists for the home. The applicants’ property has only 125 feet in depth making the 50-foot front and rear yard setbacks difficult to meet. The existing home meets the required 50-foot front setback and was granted a variance for the location 30 feet from the rear. Staff finds the applicants’ request for a setback variance is reasonable considering the nature of the small lot neighborhood and the location of the existing home. There are trees between the applicants’ property and the property to the rear which offer some screening. The deck is not proposed to encroach closer to the rear lot line than the existing home and it does not appear that it will limit the light, air, and open space between the properties. It also does not alter the character of the immediate neighborhood. The Planning Commission should note that there is an 83 square foot shed located between the home and the front lot line. The shed is 19.6 feet from the front lot line. This shed was constructed by a previous property owner and not the applicants. No permits exist for this shed and it exists in an illegal location. The Planning Commission should discuss whether or not it would be appropriate to require the applicants to relocate the shed to a conforming location. Planning Staff recommends approval of the rear setback variance for the proposed deck. Schoenzeit asked if the Planning Commission should address the shed. Curtis stated in her view it should be addressed. Currently the shed is illegal but it is new enough that it could either be removed or relocated. The applicants are allowed the shed but in a different location. Landgraver asked if the shed is attached to the ground somehow. Curtis indicated it appears to be just set on the ground. Brian Henning, Applicant, stated they would like the Planning Commission to consider the fact that they are located on a dead-end road and are the second to the last house from the end. There is very little traffic on the road so not very many people will see the shed. The shed is also sided and contains two double- hung windows with a shingled, peak roof that matches the house. The lot has quite a bit of slope to it which limits the areas where the shed could be located. Henning indicated if it is located up in the corner, it would be quite a walk from the house. Henning distributed pictures of the property. Henning stated in their view it is a nice looking building and that it has been there for quite some time. None of the neighbors have complained about it. Henning requested the Planning Commission consider allow the shed in its current location. Item #01 - PC Agenda - 06/17/2013 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 05/20/2013 [Page 5 of 25]