08-12-1996 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTKS OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JIJLY 15. 19% (#6 - #2150 Kent and Susan Swanson - Continued) Mabusth reported that the existing residence was built prior to the current Shoreland regulation.s The majority of the residence is located in front of the average lakeshore setback as it is located on a peninsula and lot is pie-shaped. The applicants are proposing a single-story bay addition which will extend no closer to lake than the existing 3' deck A 27 s.f kitchen expansion addition will replace an upper level deck at 76 s f. There would be no reduction in hardcover as a 3' path or walk exists below deck A second addition involves a kitchen expansion of 27 s f located over existing hardcover and upper level deck One addition is within the 0-75' setback and the other in the 75-250’ setback One addition would be 49' in front of the average lakeshore back and the other at 33' The setback of the lakeside deck exists at 58.5' and bay addition is proposed 65' to the lake. Mabusth added that she has received no calls from the neighbors, and there is no visual impact from the proposal Peterson informed the applicants for the reason for the average lakeshore setback. It is to eliminate a leap frog effect from home improvements He noted that the average lakeshore setback was meaningless for this particular property due to its configuration. Stoddard questioned whether both additions were necessary to meet the needs of the family. Peterson said there was a plan to complete both changes He continued by noting the location of the home close to the lake requiring a variance, the reductions made, and creation of a different type of structure for stmcture, the problem arises when there are continual increases in hardcover Susie Swanson replied that the setback was at 50' when the home was built meeting the code at that time. Mabusth added that the majority of the home was also out of the 0-75' setback. Smith was informed that the same architect was being used who originally designed the improvements ''.'f *he re.sidence in the early 1980’s and 1993 Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve #2150 for both additions Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 1, Peterson, stating he was not opposed to the application but to the encroachment of the average lakeshore setback (#7) #2151 JOHN AND JANICE HURD, 2795 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:25-9:03 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicants, along with their architect, were present. 1 4