02-18-1997 Planning Commission Minutes

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 18, 1997 0 (#6 _ #2207 Jonathan and Theresa Hofer - Continued) Smith asked if they had considered building out to the side of the property instead of upwards in order to create a less massive appearance. Hofer said there were three old and large oak trees on the side which they would like to preserve. He also did not desire to add to hardcover. He felt an additional story would make the structure too tall. He noted the addition does not block any views to the lake. The 340 s.f of additional living space would allow the applicants to divide the current living room into two small bedrooms. McMillan inquired about the condition of the garage foundation. Hofer said it was solid. During public comments, James Ogland, 3345 Crystal Bay Road, said he had no problem with the plans of the applicant. It was his opinion that these plans would enhance the property and would not block the lake views. He also noted that the house to the east of the subject property was no longer on Dakota Rail property. Ogland said the property owner had purchased the additional 25' from Dakota Rail. Hofer informed the Commission that it was his intent to make exterior repairs. The front and side of the residence would be white stucco and the remainder a maintenance -free siding. The roof would be upgraded to shingles. The work will be performed by a contractor. • McMillan moved., Schroeder seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2207. Pp pp Smith asked the exterior repairs be a condition of the approval. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ( #8) #2210 KENT E. SWANSON, 3229 B CASCO CIRCLE, VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:05 -8:11 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicants were present. Van Zomeren reported that the subject property is located within the LRl -C Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, which requires 1/2 acre minimum lot size and is sewered. Structural coverage is not an issue as there is less than the 15% allowable. A Lakeshore setback variance is required due to the peninsula -shape of the lot. The existing structure is located 15 -17' in front of the average lakeshore setback. The deck does not extend beyond the screened porch. The structure is 50' forward of the lakeshore setback. The application is an amendment to a previously approved variance request to allow for an existing l'x7' deck off the master bedroom on the third level to be extended to 5'x7'. The 4' extension would add 28 s.f but with the walkway and deck, it would result in only 14 s.f of additional hardcover or 2.72% increase. •