My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/20/2014 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
10/20/2014 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2018 12:27:48 PM
Creation date
12/21/2018 12:27:45 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,October 20,2014 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Schoenzeit asked whether the 17 percent would be grandfathered in and would have to be granted for an <br /> in-kind rebuild. <br /> Gaffron stated the Planning Commission will need to outline the justification for the increase. Gaffron <br /> stated that should not become the new standard but that the Planning Commission should make findings <br /> that make this variance unique so the next application does not automatically get the 17 percent. <br /> Thiesse indicated he is in agreement with that. <br /> McGrann asked what structural coverage the lot would support if there was a rebuild. <br /> Schoenzeit stated if the 17 percent is granted now, if the house burnt down, they could rebuild in the 17 <br /> percent footprint. <br /> Mack noted he drafted Finding No. 4,proposal which reads that the proposal involves a 2 percent <br /> structural coverage variance but is offset by the fact that additional land area is owned with the property <br /> on the opposite side of Ferndale Road West even though it cannot be technically applied to the lakeward <br /> side of the property. <br /> Mack illustrated on the overhead monitor the survey and the piece of land located across the roadway. <br /> Leskinen asked how big the parcel is across the street. <br /> Curtis indicated it is 3.56 acres. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the concern is the extra two percent in structural coverage. <br /> Todd Irvine stated he is not sure where the additional square footage of 595 square feet came from. <br /> Schoenzeit stated there is an addition to the building in addition to the landscaping. <br /> Irvine noted the addition is only 269 square feet. <br /> Mack stated Staff used the applicants' hardcover calculation worksheet for the proposed and identified <br /> which ones of those were hardcover versus structure. Mack stated it is possible the addition constitutes <br /> less structural coverage than what is listed in Staffs report. <br /> Schoenzeit noted there are lots of things that are structural, such as a 6-foot tall deck. <br /> Irvine noted that is the only structural addition that is being proposed. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the worksheet might be wrong that Staff took the numbers from. <br /> Irvine stated the worksheet was not prepared by them and that the house addition is 269 square feet. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the surveyor's worksheet might be wrong. <br /> Irvine stated the surveyor's worksheet reflects 269 square feet. <br /> Page 20 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.