06-21-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MAY 17. 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. (11. M04-3015 ROBERT LtND O.N BEHALF OF WILUAM AND BONMBEL BYERS. Continued) Curtis recommended the following approx-als: 1. Approval of the average lakeshore setback xwences in order to add a balcony to the second story of the eastern side, and to remos’c U?c front deck, change the rooflinc and add a w itch's hat feature to the w estern portion of the lake side of the home. 2. Appros’al of a side setback variance m order to construct an open balcony over an c.xistuig sitting room w'h^ roof currently exists 26 4’ from the property line where 30' is required and 26 4' setback currently extsts. 3. Approval of the conditional use pemut for lakeshore alterations. Heav>' dut> silt fence with steel t* posts should be iitstalled along the shoreline once construction begins to pro:.ct the exposed slope The silt feiKe should be maintained throughout the construction process and remain m place until the slope IS stabilized and vegetation is established. 4. Implementation of the recommendations of the Ciiy Engineer. With respect to the hardcover variance to allow 28.31% where 29.48% exists and 25% is allowed Curtis recommended that the Planning Commission deny this wiance and ask the applicants to reconfigure the proposed driveway (or other hardcover) to meet the 25^'o hardcover requirement. Robert Lund, architect for the Byars' project at 1389 Orono Lane, illustrated the site's constraints, emphasizing the following. a. The existing 4<car garage at the north end of the property’ on Orono (.ane is over the property* line and needs to be removed. He pointed out that if the garage w ere moved just south of the 50' setback off Orono Lane it would increase hardcover in the 75'-250' setback zone. b. The vegetation on the lot's western side effectively screens the western house (neighbor) from the Byars' property. c. The topographic features constrain the driveway and parking layout, as there the proposed dnveway leads the level area to be used for parking. d. The well location is within the level area proposed for parking Mr. Lund asked the Planning Commission to review the project as a whole, recognizing that the garage is proposed for the 75’-250' setback zone and its drastic mcrease of hardcover burden in that zone. He explained that currently there is parking for four cars in a garage in the 250'*5(X)'setback zone and surface parking for four cars within the 7S*‘250' .setback zone. What the applicant is proposing is to reduce the garage from a 4- car garage in the 250’-500' setback zone to a 2-car garage within the 75'-250 setback zone and reduce surface parking for four cars to only three cars. To accomplish this. Mr. Lund explained a lot of groundcover would be removed on the eastern side, on the southern side and the existing dnveway and parking along the northeastern portion. Overall, he stated that hardcover would be reduced in tiK 250'-S00'setback zone by 1,064 s.f. reducing hardcover m the 7S'-250' setback zone by 310 s.f. and there is really no hardcover change to the 0'-75' setback zone. Overall hardcover reduction for the project is 1.374 s.f.. structural coverage is reduced by 109 s.f. and the hardcover for the lot as a whole remains essentially the same by increasing lO.S s.f. In addition, Mr. Lund pointed out the owner's strong environmental concerns and proposes to construct a ram garden to handle surface water run-oiT in the 0-7S' setback zone that should more than handle the extra amount of run-off brought on by the proposed hardcover mcreases. Giatr Mabusth asked for public comments. Mr. Byars, applicant, explained their attempts to reduce hardcover by reducing from the four car garage to a two car garage and removal of the back stoop and fnmt deck. He added there is a need for some surface Page 30 of 40