My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-17-1996 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1996
>
06-17-1996 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/13/2023 3:21:07 PM
Creation date
9/13/2023 3:17:23 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
227
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Zoning File #2137 <br />May 15, 1996 <br />Page 2 <br />Pertiiieiit Facts <br />I.In October 1995, applicants were granted a vj^iance to add an entry way and replace <br />retaining walls. A proposed 10’ x 33' enclosed porch and 10’ x 16' open deck on the <br />lakeside of the existing house were specifically denied in that application. Approval <br />was conditioned on significant removals of hardcover. Most of the work, incliKling <br />hardcoNer removals, is underway or has been completed. <br />Applicants now propose to convert the existing deck at the southeast end of the house <br />to an enclosed room for a swim spa. The rwm will be of a slightly different <br />configuration than the deck, and slightly smaller in footprint area. The proposed <br />addition will meet the required 10' side setback, but requires the following variances: <br />Additional structure less than 75' from the lake. <br />Change in character of hardcover in 0*75' zone (chajiging from deck to enclosed <br />structure, net result is hardcover decrease of 24 s.f.) <br />Increase in lot coverage by structures from 15.6% to 16,7%. <br />Additional structure encroaching average setback line. <br />Discussion <br />Please review the letter from Dale Gustafson of Gustafson Design, who is representing the <br />Dunkieys, and the letter from the neighboring property owner, Douglas Bell. The applicants’ <br />need for the spa is related to a health condition, and apparently the spa cannot be incorporated <br />into the existing house. Planning Commission may wish to have applicant address whether <br />there are other possible locations on the site that might accommodate this addition. <br />Applicants have completed significant hardcover removals per the previous approval conditions, <br />including the removal of extensive (and what turned out to be very deep) rock beds. Permits <br />for the entrywa> and retaining wall work were issued after applicants' surveyor had provided <br />detailed hardcover calculations, indicating a final hardcover (consider this as "current <br />hardcover"^ of 35.4% in the 0-75' zone and 49.0% in the 75-250' zone. Recall that these were <br />reduced from 49.6% and 74.2% respectively. The current proposal results in a net decrease <br />in the 0-75' zone of 24 s.f. of hardcover, reducing that to 35.2%. <br />The average lakeshore setback encroachment includes virtually the entire house, since this <br />property sits on a point, more or less, when the lagoon is taken into account. The proposed <br />spa room location is such that no significant views of the lake enjoyed by neighboring property <br />owners will be affected. <br />t <br />.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.