Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MONDAY, OCTOBER 19.1998 <br />(#2410 Peter Boynton, continued) <br />hardcover In the 0*75* setback and 75>250' setback, a variance to the structural lot coverage, and a <br />height variance. A conditional use pennit is also required to allow for any grading In the 0-75' <br />setback. <br />Van Zomeren stated the proposed hardcover in the 0>78' setback is 1,054 square feet or 17.9 <br />percent where 1,258 square feet is currently existing. The revised plan is also proposing hardcover <br />of 29.64 percent where 32.9 percent is currently existing. This application should be <br />treated as a complete tear down and should meet all required code provisions. <br />Van Zomeren noted the Applicant was advised at the previous meeting to limit structural coverage <br />to 1,500 square feet and to minimize the need for setback variances, which the proposed plan does <br />not comply with. <br />Chair Smith inquired whether the new plan Is proposing to go up with the new structure. <br />Van Zomeren replied the proposed structure does exceed the standard height requirements. <br />Boynton stated they are attempting to design something that will fit over the old building pad. <br />Boynton commented the existing foundation is not suitable and the house is deteriorating. <br />Boynton's builder stated the street is lower than the existing residence. <br />Schroeder inquired when the property was purchased. <br />Boynton stated they purchased the property three years ago with the intention of remodeling the <br />existing structure. <br />Van Zomeren stated the Applicant has discussed the height of the proposed structure with Staff <br />which requires a variance to the height requirement. <br />Boynton stated the proposed structure is 30 feet higher than the road without the ten feet credit for <br />the elevation of the street. <br />Lindquist stated he does not have a problem with the height of the structure, but noted the proposed <br />structure should comply with the structural coverage limit. <br />Boynton stated they are attempting to utilize the same building pad because a neighbor had <br />expressed concerns about the house being located further back. <br />Chair Smith inquired whether there were any public comments concerning this application. <br />Boynton commented they are attempting to comply with the requirements as much as possible. <br />Chair Smith stated some variances will be needed, noting the structure could be constructed to <br />lessen some of the vanances. <br />Tom Mortenson, 1971 Fagerness Point Road, stated he has spoken with Mr. Boynton about the <br />proposed structure. Mortenson commented he has a problem with the height of the structure, noting <br />the Applicant is proposing to construct a 40 foot wall six feet from the lot line which will block his <br />view considerably. <br />Page 3