Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON JULY 17, 1995 <br />• <br />(#4 - ##2033 Donald & Arlene Kielley - Continued) <br />Rowlette said a side variance presented no problem in her view as the next residence over <br />was a fair distance away. <br />Lindquist moved, Rowlette seconded, to approve Application #2033 with the condition <br />that all plastic areas be removed as well as the concrete and gravel areas. The removal of <br />the rock on the north side will be dependent on Staff findings concerning drainage. It shall <br />be further noted that this would be the maximum amount of structural coverage allowed <br />on this property in the future without removal of existing structure. Ayes 4, Nays 0. <br />( #5) #2034 MARY AND GENE ZULK, 1400 CHERRY PLACE - VARIANCES - <br />PUBLIC HEARING 7:51 -8:01 P.M. <br />The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. <br />Mr. Zulk was present. <br />This application is for a 10x26' covered deck addition on the street side. A structural <br />coverage variance is required. Structural coverage exists at 17.6 %, allowed at 15 %, and <br />is proposed at 19.9 1/o, for an increase of 263 s.f, or 2.3 %. Mabusth reported that <br />hardcover can be reduced in the 75 -250' zone with the removal of a rock patio at <br />northeast side of residence of 175 s.f. Hardcover exists at 49.2 %, proposed at 51.8 %, for <br />an additional 213 s.f, , or 2.64 1/o. No side setback variance is required. <br />Mabusth asked the applicant if there was any existing hardcover areas that could be <br />removed to offset the hardcover amount. Zulk said he had no drainage problems and <br />suggested removal of the stone patio on the northeast side. <br />Lindquist asked about the walkway on the north side of the property. This was found to <br />be used to access the lower level. There are stairs to access this level, and Zulk said the <br />sidewalk underneath could be removed, but decking will be placed over this area. <br />Lindquist said, although he was unhappy with additional hardcover, he saw no area where <br />removal could be done to offset the new. Mabusth noted with the removal of the 175 s.f. <br />or 2.2% of patio hardcover, there would be an overall reduction in hardcover. This results <br />in less hardcover than originally existed. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Commission asked that a disclaimer be added to the resolution allowing no more structural <br />improvements on this property in the future without removal of existing structures. <br />is <br />