02-21-2001 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, January 17,2001 (M2639 2U)ning Code Amendment, Continued) Bcllovxs inquired whether it goes to the railroad tracks. GafTron stated the nc>v Comprehensive Plan identifies an area east of Willow Drive bct%\‘een the tracks and Watertown Road that has been guided for single family/higher density. Gaffran stated that area could potentially be developed through the RPUD standards and could be included in the Highway 12 corridor study area There were no public comments relating to this matter Kluth moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application M2639, Zoning Code Amendment, Orono Municipal Zoning Code, Section 10.52. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Item Nos. 7 'hrough 11 follow Item 12) («12) <t2651 STEPHEN LONGMAN BUILDERS. INC, ON BEHnLi OF ROBIN A JEREMY BUPP, 2696 CAROLINE AVENUE. VARIANCES, 7:09 p.m. - 8:09 p.m. Jerem\ Bupp. Property Owner, and Stephen Longman, Builder, were present The Ccnifiote of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted Weinberger staled the Applicants were issued a building permit on June 20,2000, »r* construct a new house on this property. A temporary certificate of occupancy lias been issued on Januarv 17, 2001, as the house is considered complete subject to a few conditions that still need to be met before the final certificate of occupancy can be issued Weinberger stated some grading issues still need to be completed as well as installation of drain tile and excavation of the drainage swale Weinberger stated at the time the building permit was approv ed, the site plan did meet all the requirements of Orono's Ordinances and the State Building Code A later review of the site plan, which occurred after the City receiv ed some phone calls from the adjoining property owners, discovered that the onginal site plan submitted by the surveyor was mcorrect with regard to the 75 foot lakeshorc setback A new survey was submined depicting the correct shoreline, with a snull portion of the property being located within 75 feet of the lakeshorc that was not originallv deducted from the buildable portion of the lot Weinberger stated this created a situation where the owners were required to omit certain items of hardcover on the property to renuin within the 25 percent requirement. The areas that do reflect the changes to the site plan relate to a patio, which has not been constructed, and to the dnveway, which has been constructed to a minimal ten foot width It was determined by* City Staff and the property owners that the ten foot width w as the minimum w idth that could be constructed and still be able to fully utilize the three-stall garage on the property*. Weinberger stated since the mistake on the survey was not found until after the house was almost completed, it was difficult to make any* revisions to the plan. The grading plan submitted by the Applicant does address concerns raised by City Staff concerning the property*, with drainage swales PAGE 7