My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-19-1992 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1992
>
10-19-1992 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2023 10:34:49 AM
Creation date
1/19/2023 10:18:15 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
294
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
r <br />Zoning File #1768 <br />October 14, 1992 <br />Page 3 <br />alterations proposed encroach the lakeshore protected area. Note <br />hardcover facts have only dealt with the comparison of <br />improvements at the time of issuance of recent building permit <br />and Plan B improvements. <br />The driveway expansion proposed with Plan B proposes major <br />filling and grading activities resulting in the installation of <br />two tiers of retaining walls. Note also retaining walls and <br />filling are proposed in the lakeshore yard. Any mature trees to <br />be removed as a result of building permit or Plan B Improvements <br />have already been replanted on property. <br />There is a 50-75* wide grassed drainage corridor that runs <br />along the south side of the property. The area receives the <br />majority of runoff from the local watershed. The major filling <br />required for Plan B improvements will call for a separate <br />conditional use permit review as filling activities cannot be <br />connected to the building permit as protection of frost footings <br />or providing positive drainage from foundation. Please note <br />retaining wall hardcover was not included in the hardcover facts. <br />The City Engineer will be asked to review the filling and grading <br />plan submitted with the conditional use permit to ensure there is <br />no impact on the historic drainageway that serves the area. <br />Prior to applicant submitting a formal CUP applicationr it is <br />necessary for the Planning Commission to determine if variances <br />are to be granted. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />Applicant proposes a 5% increase in hardcover improvements <br />within the 75-250* setback area. What improvements are <br />acceptable and if variances are to be granted, what percentage is <br />acceptable? <br />136 s.f. of garage expansion = .6% <br />835 s.f. increase in paving improvements = 3.5% <br />231.9 s.f. of deck to replace former deck at 168 s.f. = .97% <br />247.2 s.f. of additional patio area = 1.04% <br />Description of Hardship <br />Refer to applicants* addendum. Exhibit B, specifically the <br />paragraphs dealing with the hardship statement and findings for <br />Plan B Improvements.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.