Laserfiche WebLink
IT m MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNflSSION <br />MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 16. 1996 <br />(#14 - #2104 B. Scott Ball - Continued) <br />Gaffi'on condi.ued that the proposal calls for lot area, lot width, and average lakeshore <br />setback variances. The property consists of .88 acres in the 2-acre zoning district. The <br />property docs not meet the 200' lot width requirement wth 180* width and 163’ at the 75 ’ <br />line. The 75 ’ setback is met. The proposal is for a conforming 30* side setback. The <br />hardcover needs to be adjusted slighriy to meet the 25% limit. Gafifron reponed that the <br />existing house is located all in front of the average lakeshore setback line. The proposed <br />house would be located with a slight encroachment of that line but has no impact on lake <br />views ergoyed by the neighboring properties. <br />Gaffron noted that the new plan has not yet been reviewed by the City Engineer. The <br />garage proposed at 938 ’ would need to be contoured to the 940’ elevation. Three feet of <br />fill would be required to the basement level to bring the elevation from 932.5’ to 935’ to <br />meet the flood plain requirements. The fill would need to come up to the driveway. <br />Gaffron said the City files show a historic concern with the drainage to the neighboring <br />property to the east. This will be reviewed by the Engineer so as not to impact the <br />neighbors. Gaffron said the Engineer’s review will occur prior to the application going <br />before the Council.. <br />Stickney noted that there was very little slope or elevation change to the proposal. <br />Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2104 the <br />hardcover meeting the 25®/o allowed, the drainage and grading plans to be reviewed and <br />approved by the Engineer prior to final Council action. Vote: Ayes 4. Nays 0. <br />SKETCH PLAN REVIEW <br />(#15) #2103 ORONO HOCKEY BOOSTERS, INC. 1025 OLD CRYSTAL BAY <br />RO.AD NORTH - CONCEPTUAL PLAN REVTEW <br />Mabusth noted that the agenda item w^ for <br />4 Im not legally combined <br />all of their owned parcels and have buddings and uses that expand from one parcel to <br />another. A lease period of 35-55 years is proposed with an option to purchase at any <br />time. Mabusth said the major issue for this application is a land use matter as ere is <br />exact fit for this use within the City code.