My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-17-1998 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1998
>
02-17-1998 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2023 1:14:04 PM
Creation date
7/27/2023 1:05:22 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
366
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Zoning File #2326 <br />January 16, 1998 <br />Page 11 <br />Review of Variance Requests <br />1.Hardcover. ‘ <br />The northerly 1/3 of southerly 1/6 of the site are located within the 500-1,000 hardcover zone <br />which allows 35% hardcover. The central portion of the property is not in a defined <br />hardcover zone. In the northerly 1/3, hardcover is proposed at approximately 48%. On the <br />southerly 1/6, hardcover is proposed at approximately 77%. These two areas combined yield <br />approximately 55% hardcover where only 35% is allowed. The central portion of the <br />property not located in hardcover zone would appear to be in the 70% hardcover range. It <br />is interesting to note that neither of the t\vo hardcover zones identified discharge to the water <br />body which defines them, i.e. the northerly zone is defined by Ciy stal Bay and the southerly <br />zone by Carmens Bay, but both zones actually drain to Lafayette Bay. Additionally all that <br />drainage will first discharge to a retention pond, then flow through two distinct wetland <br />basins before it reaches Lafayette Bay. <br />Hardcover Issues for Consideration <br />a. <br />b. <br />Absent further detail or hardship statement, will Planning Commission consider <br />granting the magnitude of hardcover variances requested? Is there any hardship that <br />justifies the variance? Is this the intensity of use envisioned in the B-5 district? <br />Does the fact that all storm water will be treated in the storm water pond and flow <br />through two wetlands prior to reaching the lake, suggest that the excessive hardcox er <br />has a limited impact? <br />2. Front (streeO parking setback: <br />The B-5 District requires a 20' front yard. Section 10.61, Subd. 5 (B) defines that for B <br />Districts parking is not allowed in a required yard. Although that code section discusses the <br />B-1, B-2, B-3 and B-4 Districts but not the B-5 District, staff would argue that this is an error <br />and that this standard was also intended to apply to the B-5 District. Applicant proposes <br />parking along the front line within the 5' of that lot line where a 20 ’ setback would be <br />required. Applicant's request for this variance is to provide for all of the uses proposed for <br />the site, i.e. accommodating the proposed building size and shape while providing functional <br />parking lot and providing space for the storm water pond which serves both this site and the <br />Culvers site adjacent. <br />Parking Location Variance Issues for Consideration: <br />a. Will Planning Commission recommend approval for a 15' variance to allow' parking
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.