04-17-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTHS OF THH ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON APRIL 17, 1995 (#5 - #2008 Tessa Marchcssault/Gregory Becker - Continued) The proposal is for a I I\I8‘ single-stor> addition and a I4’xl4’ pt>rtico addition to be built over existing non-structural hardcover All setbacks would be met as well as the average lakeshore setback The issue is the excess of hardcover in the 75-250* zone There is currently 29 5% The proposal would reduce the hardcover to 27 3*o with the removal of the concrete patio and rock area underlined w ith plastic located in Iront of the residence. Mabusth review^ the proposed floor plan Nolan inquired of the applicant if the sidewalk would be affected by the portico addition. Becker reported that the addition would come up to the edge of the sidewalk. Nolan, noting that the applicant needs to be sens.iive to the drainage area of the property, asked about hardcover concessions at the blacktop area near the upper level garage The applicant reported having no plans to remove any of the blacktop areas at the higher elevations because of potential erosion problems Schroeder asked the applicant if there was any encroacliment of driveway areas. The applicant responded that the neighbor’s encroachment is noted on the application and there is also an easement on the property There were no public comments Rowlette commented on the proposed removal of 574 s f of patio cement, noting that a partial amount of the cemented area would need to remain for egress from the patio door area It was found that the applicant did not wish to remov e all of this cemented patio area, which would result in the need to recalculate the hardcover percentages Lindquist remarked that the actual reduction in hardcover in the patio area would be approximately 200 s f It was suggested to the applicant that the 14'xl4’concrete block patio be made smaller The applicant agreed to a reduction in the patio area to 5'x5'. When asked by Schroeder if the hardcover in the garage area could be removed to aid in hardcover reductions in the 250’-500* zone, the applicant commented that his only purpose was to acquire approval of the new additions and did not wish to remove any additional hardcover Becker said he did not see any purpose and perceived negative changes in drainage for the property with the removal of the blacktop by the driveway Nolan responded that the area in question was not necessary and acts as a means by which runoff trav els downhill towards the lake Nolan noted that if the blacktop was removed and the area properly graded, there should be no problem with water running into the garage.