My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/21/2014 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
04/21/2014 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2018 11:13:36 AM
Creation date
12/21/2018 11:13:33 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br /> MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,April 21,2014 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> The applicant's property is approximately 0.38 acre in size where 0.5 acre is required. The property is <br /> also located along the channel between North Arm and Crystal Bay resulting in lakeshore on functionally <br /> two sides with a steep slope up to County Road 51 to the rear. The proposed home meets the 10-foot side <br /> setback as well as the 30-foot setback from the rear lot line. The majority of the property is located <br /> within the 0-75 foot zone. <br /> The applicant is proposing a plan which does not result in additional hardcover over what currently exists <br /> and is proposing to construct the new home in generally the same location as the existing home. The total <br /> proposed hardcover is below 25 percent. However, due to the shape of the lot,much of the proposed <br /> hardcover is within the 75-foot setback, which will require a variance. The existing home on the property <br /> does extend into the 75-foot lake area as well. Demolition of the home does not require a conditional use <br /> permit for the grading but minor grading within the 75-foot setback is proposed with the new home's <br /> construction. The City Engineer has reviewed the grading plan and did not identify any significant <br /> • <br /> concerns. <br /> By code, conditionally permitted uses must be reviewed using the criteria found in Section 78-916 and <br /> 78-1286 of the Shoreland regulations. With regard to this application, Items 2, 6, 7, 9 and 13 are <br /> generally applicable and Staffs analysis is included in Staffs report. Upon review, Staff believes the <br /> proposed grading within the 75-fot area is necessary and will have no impact on surrounding lands. <br /> Drainage patterns for runoff leaving the site are not proposed to be significantly altered. Additionally,the <br /> proposed grading within the 75-foot setback has been designed to minimize any environmental impacts. <br /> Staff finds the orientation of the property with respect to the county road,the private access road, and the <br /> lakeshore results in a practical difficulty for locating a conforming envelope for a reasonable sized home. <br /> The conforming building pad is approximately 45 feet deep and varies between 40 to 12 feet in width as <br /> the 75-foot setback cuts through at an angle. <br /> The applicant's proposed home is very similar in footprint size and shape to the existing home that is. <br /> being replaced. The plans for the new home reflect sensitivity regarding height and massing as the <br /> second story portion of the home is located away from the lake. The design and orientation should reduce <br /> the feel of massing with the 75-foot setback area,particularly along the channel. <br /> Planning Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit and variances. <br /> Lemke asked if they need a variance if they are replacing exactly in kind. <br /> Curtis indicated they do not but that the applicant's proposal is to construct the home beyond what <br /> currently exists. The new house will consist of the same square footage as the existing house. <br /> Landgraver asked if there will be a basement. <br /> Curtis indicated there will not be and that it will be a slab on grade construction. <br /> Al Hagen,Applicant, stated he would be willing to address any questions the Planning Commission may <br /> have. Hagen indicated they are proposing to relocate the new home ten feet from the property line and <br /> that they have pivoted the original footprint on the one corner of the garage. Hagen stated they are also <br /> staying away from the county access located in the back as well as the utility easement. The reason for <br /> relocating it slightly was to make it ten feet from the neighboring property rather than eight feet. <br /> Page 4 of 19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.