Laserfiche WebLink
II ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR JULY 21,1997 <br />(#13 - #2264 Janet C. Kieman - Continued) <br />new construction. Gaffron said it is questionable whether the use of current footings would <br />allow "grandfathering” of the current setback. Lindquist said the use of the current foundation <br />would have to be clarified. Gaffron said from the staff standpoint, the application as presented is <br />viewed as new construction. <br />Hawn asked if the applicant considered a plan which would move the house back on the <br />property. Kieman reviewed her plans noting the designer, contractor, and inspector felt it would <br />be more expensive to mesh old plans with new. Kieman said she had not considered moving the <br />house back. She indicated that it would incur more expense to have another plan drawn and she <br />would prefer not to. Schroeder said it would not necessarily involve a totally new plan. <br />Lindquist was informed that all of the existing structure would be removed except for the <br />foundation. Lindquist said he would recommend that all stmcture be located behind the 75' <br />setback. <br />Kieman asked if a 30' side setback would be considered a problem. Lindquist said it was not <br />from his perspective. He was informed that the existing side setback is 14.5'. Hawn noted that <br />the property is very' well screened. Schroeder noted there were trees located on the other side. <br />Lindquist noted the small size of the lot for the zoning district. He asked if the property is going <br />to be sewered. Gaffron said it is the City's intent to do so as soon as all property owners involved <br />are on board. It has been determined that the cost of the sewer project is more than earlier <br />anticipated. <br />Hawn inquired about hardcover calculations. Gaffron said they have not been included. He <br />noted that the property was allowed 27.6% in the 75-250' setback and 2.9% in the 0-75' setback, <br />and the applicant intends to meet those requirements. Kieman said she thought the current plan <br />proposes less than that amount. <br />Lindquist said he would recommend all hardcover be behind the 75' setback. Schroeder said the <br />issue is the prior approval allowing the hardcover amounts as noted. Lindquist noted this <br />application is for new constmction. Gaffron explained the necessary changes to move all <br />structure behind the 75- setback. <br />Hawn suggested making the driveway more narrow and perpendicularly connecting it to the <br />house. Kieman said the costs would then double.