Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />L <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 <br />(#3 - #2169 Michael Renard - Continued) <br />Lir dquist asked what the hardcover facts were. Mabusth asked for a breakdown of the <br />h'.rdcover calculations and whether it included the landscaping. Betz showed the survey <br />10 Mabusth, who did not have a copy of this particular survey. Discussion was had on the <br />particulars of the hardcover. It was determined that if the 130 s.f of landscape rock in the <br />0-75' was removed, along with 420 s.f in the 75-250' setback, there would be no need for <br />a hardcover variance. Schroeder said he was concerned with trading of plastic and rock as <br />it should not have been there in the first place. The plastic was installed by a previous <br />owner. Schroeder said the hardcover should be separated showing what does and does <br />not count. Mabusth said it would not be required if there was no hardcover variance <br />required in the 75-250' setback and would only involve the average lakeshore setback. <br />Schroeder questioned whether this was actually known. Mabusth clarified that the <br />hardcover total was originally 6142 s.f or 26.7% where 5707 s.f is allowed. With the <br />removal of the 420 s.f of landscape rock and plastic, the square footage of hardcover <br />would be at 24.9% and not require a variance. <br />Smith asked why the shed was an issue in 1991 . Mabusth said it was because the <br />hardcover exceeded the allowed at 26.7%. With the shed removal, the hardcover would <br />be at 25.5%. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Schroeder said he was reluctant to allow the shed since the Council in 1991 recommended <br />its removal with the same basic numbers presented. Lindquist noted that the structure was <br />proposed larger at that time. Mabusth said there was also more hardcover and the <br />updated survey was not available. Mabusth said the removal of plastic and rock would <br />result in a 1.8% reduction from 26.7% to 24.9%. <br />Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2169 with the <br />understanding that all plastic on the property would ’*e removed along with the cement <br />pad located in the 0-75' setback. The application would only involve a variance to the <br />average lakeshore setback, and the shed would be allowed to remain. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays <br />0. <br />(#4) #2159 JAMES AND JOANN JUNDT, 1400 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD <br />VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:30-7:54 P.M. <br />The Applicant was present. <br />Gaffron reported that the application was tabled at the request of the applicant at the <br />August 19 meeting of the Planning Commission. He noted that the application has been <br />revised by the withdrawal of the boathouse from the application.