08-18-2003 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, July 21,2003 6:00 o’clock pjn. («H3 «03-2916 PHILLIP SMITH, CMtteacd) Mr. Smith submitted a neighborhood recommendation from four neighbors stq>pofting his position to reduce I s.f of hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback area for e\ cry 2 new s.f. in the 75-250’ setback area. Mr. Smith explained that his home is oriented to the lake and has four doors \^hich exit to the lakeside. In an effort to maintain the character of his home, he suggested that he remove 300 s.f from the 0-75 ’. He expressed his hesitation to remove additional pavement from the driveway, since the road is a private driveway with no where to park. As proposed. Smith stated that they would build over the I Vi car garage. With regard to the stormwater diversion. Smith indicated that he could divert all but one of the gutters away from the lakeside. There w ere no public comments. Hawn stated that she had a problem supporting the 1:2 removal ratio. She added that the shed was currently too close to the property line and would need to be relocated or removed. In addition, she felt further removals than the estimated 300 s.f. offered would be required. Mabusth questioned whether the Commission could support a redesign of the drainage flow , if their interest did not support the 1:2 removals. Rahn concurred w ith the staff recommended 1:1 remov al ratio. Mabusth stated that she did not wish to sec further driveway reductions, and believed the removals would need to come from the patio. Smith p«>inted out tliat he had tried to save tlie patio and create something that would reduce runoff into the lake. He maintained that this vvas not a large lot, that most of the home falls vv ithin the 0-75 ’ setback /one. and 40% of the property is not counted in hardcover calculations. While he was willing to move the shed, he encouraged the Commission to review this application in the variance process based on its own merits and not the cookie cutter standards often mandated across the board. Chair Smith indicated that the Commission would be inclined to support the staff recommendation, along w ith removals of landscape fabric, and asked the applicant whether he would prefer the Commission vote on or table the application. Smith asked if the Commission could vote on the portions of the application independently and provide him the opportunity to present his 1:2 remo\*al ratio recommendation to the City Council, along with his plan to redirect runoff away from the lakeside of the residence. PAGE 21 of 37