Laserfiche WebLink
0 <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON APRIL 15, 1996 <br />(^5 - #2088 Winfield Stephens - Continued) <br />Mabusth reviewed direction given by the Planning Commission in previous meetings <br />advising that structural co\erage be minimized in order to meet the code The setback <br />variances were to be reduced It was also requested that no new addition be permitted to <br />the east so as not to impact the views of the neighbor to the northeast. A 6' expansion is <br />proposed or. the east side <br />The variances required in the application are for setbacks, hardcover in the 250'-500' <br />setback area and lot area Mabusth said the proposal involves a 2*story residence with the <br />attached garage The residence struaure would be 50’ from the Ba> side right-of-way with <br />the co\ ered deck at 45' setback The garage, which encroached l.andmark Drive, will be <br />removed The 15’ setback from the west lot line would satisfy the agreement with the <br />Landmark Homeowners Association The City requires a 50' setback A 3' setback <br />variance '-.ould be required from the north side lot line 15% structural coverage is <br />allowed and is proposed at 14 3®o There is a hardcover allowance of 30% in the 75-250' <br />setback and is proposed at 48 2® o for a 18 2% excess <br />Smith asked what changes were made to the variance requests from the earlier proposal. <br />Mabusth explained that there is now an increase in the lot area reducing hardcover and <br />structural coverage excesses Setback variances would be required for the expanded <br />second story. Smith said the proposal for 4 bedrooms, a den. and a porch was still <br />excessive in her viewpoint. <br />The applicant had no additional comments but was asked about the possible loss of the <br />maples trees on the east side Stephens said there would be some loss of the maple trees <br />but was unsure how healthy one of the trees is He noted that there would oe a loss of 2 <br />oak trees to the south <br />There were no public comments <br />Hawn said she w as concerned w ith the tear down of homes on substandard lots and the <br />rebuilding of homes larger than intended for a particular zoning area She noted that the <br />codes were present to ensure the proper size homes for a lot size She was not in favor of <br />a second story expansion with the current foundation problem <br />Peterson opined that approving the side and rear setbacks created a problem <br />Smith said with proposals of rebuilding on new foundations, the City was niore critical and <br />stringent in applying the codes