Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR 19,199» <br />OAiL cJcc:o <br />commenced at this time. <br />Hawn inquired whether the new enclosed porch is entirely out of the 0>75* setback. <br />Berkman stated the enclosed porch is outside the 0>75* setback, with the existing deck <br />encroaching into the 0-75 ’ setback. <br />Kluth noted the Applicants are proposing to increase the structural coverage on this property. <br />Berkman stated they are looking at expanding the entryway. <br />Kluth inquired whether the size of the deck could be reduced slightly to lower the amount <br />of structural coverage. <br />Berkman commented tonight was the first time they heard there was a different between <br />hardcover and structural coverage. <br />Kluth stated the deck would be considered structural. <br />Hawn commented the Planning Commission is reluctant to approve structural coverage <br />which exceeds the allowable IS percent. <br />Kluth stated he does not have a problem with the proposed setbacks. Kluth stated the <br />concrete sidewalk would be considered hardcover. Kluth stated if the decK is reduced by <br />ten square feet, structural coverage would be reduced to 18.2 percent, which is the <br />existing amount of structural coverage on the property. <br />Smith suggested the Applicants keep the structural coverage at the existing limit, noting <br />the code allows up to 15 percent structural coverage. <br />Hawn suggested the Applicants revise their plan in an effort to reduce the overall structural <br />coverage on the property. <br />Smith noted City Staff is recommending reconfiguration of the lakeside deck and keeping it <br />at its present size, which will eliminate the need for a hardcover variance and encroachment <br />into the 0-75' setback area. <br />Berkman inquired whether patio stones are considered hardcover. <br />Smith stated they would be counted as hardcover. Smith inquired whether the Applicants <br />Page 44 <br />-i