02-20-1996 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

u • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 20, 1996 ( #6 - #2110 Joan Dayton - Continued) Lindquist asked Dayton if he would consider combining the three lots. Dayton said he was willing to do so in order not to create the hardcover calculation as an issue. He would combine enough of the property in order to meet the hardcover requirement noting his lack of intention in adding any more hardcover. Mabusth informed the applicant that he should analyze the facts and have the property reviewed by his surveyor as he may not wish to combine the lots noting the possible need to only combine two of the lots. Schroeder emphasized the need to look at what is occurring in Lot 2. Dayton said he would do what is necessary to expedite the application. Schroeder said any action could be made as part of the recommendation by the Commission. Dayton said he had no plans to do anything in Lot 1 and this area where the detached garage is located could be added to Lot 2. Mabusth said a lot line rearrangement or a combination of two lots could be done. Mabusth confirmed that either a legal combination with lot 3 or a lot rearrangement would solve the encroachment of the garage. Schroeder said it was a matter of clarification asking what the code says about non- structural versus structural. Mabusth said the only time structural coverage comes into play is when you are dealing with a property less than 1.99 acres in size. This applies in all zoning districts. Schroeder inquired about an earlier comment regarding structural and non - structural coverage in the 75' -250' setback. Mabusth said there are certain non- structural improvements that are allowed when dealing with a natural environmental lake, such as a grade level patio or landscape rock with underlayment as long as there is no excess hardcover in the 75 -250'. Schroeder noted that the improvements were modest, especially in light of a possible legal combination with Lot 1. Hawn said the impact was minimal as there was already hardcover underneath where the more permanent hardcover would be placed. There were no public comments. Hawn inquired if the applicant would obtain an after - the -fact permit for the garage if the lot line rearrangement was done. Dayton said he had asked the builder if he had obtained a permit and added that he was willing to apply for an after- the -fact permit if need be. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application 92110 with the understanding that a legal combination of Lots 1 and 2 be done and a lot line rearrangement between Lots 2 and 3 in order to solve the encroachment issue. This is to be resolved prior to the application going before the Council at their meeting of March 11. An after - the -fact permit must also be obtained for the detached structure. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 23