Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MONDAY, MARCH 10,2003 <br />PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS —ANDREW MCDERMOTT —Continued <br />They also want to get the trail from the Luce Line continued down to Fox Street when <br />they do the Old Crystal Bay Road repaving. <br />Sansevere asked about testing playground equipment for arsenic. Gappa stated he had <br />contacted testing companies, but they need to wait for the temperature to be above <br />freezing to get an accurate test. They would probably be able to test over the weekend <br />and would have results a few days after that. <br />Murphy stated he had heard that it wasn’t dangerous unless burned. White stated that <br />arsenic is toxic in any form in the soil, compound, wood chips, etc. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS—CYNTHIA BREMER <br />None. <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />None. <br />ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT <br />5. #02-2859 Blake and Mary Bichanich, 332 Westlake Street—Variances <br />Chaput stated that the applicants want to remove an existing home and build a new one. <br />In 1993 the applicants were granted variances to remodel the existing houses that were on <br />two adjacent lots, combining the houses into one residence. Because the remodel used <br />significant portions of each house, variances were granted, allowing side yard setbacks of <br />1 r to the south and 19.3’ to the north. Although the current application is for new <br />construction, which would require 30 ’ side yard setbacks, the applicants want to build in <br />the same area with the same side yard setbacks that were granted in 1993. <br />Other variances requested were: lot width of 100.28 ’ where 200 ’ is required, and lot area <br />of 1.34 acres where 2 acres is required. <br />The Planning Commission recommended to approve the lot width and lot area variances <br />as presented and to alter the side yard setbacks from those proposed to not less than 20 ’, <br />permitting up to a 4’ encroachment into either side yard for roof overhang, but no other' <br />structural elements, and requiring the removal of the existing shed in the 0-75 ’ zone, <br />which may be replaced with a lock box of no more than 200 s.f.