My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-14-1995 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1995
>
08-14-1995 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2023 12:01:09 PM
Creation date
10/6/2023 11:57:49 AM
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.
/
365
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
MINXTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 17. 1995 <br />(#4 - #2033 - Donald Sc Arlene Kielley - Continued) <br />Mabusth reported that an application was approved in 19S2 for a variance for a detached <br />garage. Excess hardcover was found over the amount approved in 1982. An expansion <br />of paved area was found adjacent to the garage This was not installed by the current <br />applicant A detached shed had been removed, but a connecting walkway between both <br />{^ructures was to have been removed and had not been 166 s f of hardcover was added <br />in a rock area underlined with plastic Hardcover calculations have been adiusted <br />The current application is for a 10-I/rx42-l/2’ addition to the street side ot the residence. <br />The floor plan was reviewed and calls for an expansion of a family room, a formal <br />entrance, and a covered deck area. With the addition, lot coverage would increase by 510 <br />s.f or 3 5% 15% lot coverage is allowed Lot coverage exists at 15 6®b With the <br />proposed addition, lot coverage would be at 19 1%. 4 l“o over the allowed amount A <br />hardcover reduction of 4 8% in the 0-75’ setback zone was noted Hardcover in the 75- <br />250' zone exists at 51.6% and is proposed at 52 8* « Total hardcover increase would be <br />113 s f or 0 %%. A side setback variance of 4’ would also be required The structure is <br />presently at 8" and the addition is proposed at 6'. <br />Smith suggested the triangle area of rock and concrete area between the two garages be <br />removed Smith noted that part of the new hardcover will be placed ov er non-structural <br />hardcover Lindquist agreed with the suggested removal Lindquist asked what material <br />would be used for the new walkway It will be of a concrete-ty pe material as it is now <br />Mabusth said elimination of these two areas would result in reductions of 126 s f, or <br />1.3%. in the 75-250’ zone for the plastic underlayment and 98 s f of concrete, or 1%, for <br />the area between the garages, for a total of 2 3*?b. Other removal consists of 540 s.f of <br />plastic, or 5.5%. but is also non-structural. <br />Mabusth asked if there were drainage concerns on the propeny noting erosion on the <br />north side The applicant said a small basement under the nonh corner does get damp It <br />was found that no gutters are planned Roelof said the problem lies with the gabled ends <br />being on a down slope but is not a critical problem <br />Kielley said he was concerned with removing the rock on the north side because of the <br />drainage Lindquist said the concrete and plastic would have to be removed but gravel <br />was okav Smith and Rowictte said they both preferred to see this area green Smith said <br />she would be okav with gravel if drainage was a problem Lindquist asked that the <br />applicant work with Stall'on this issue Berg suggested regrading of the area <br />There were no public comments <br />The ha»‘dcover removal as planned and suggestefJ would result in u decrease of about <br />lO'l'o Rowictte said the resolution should state for the record a hold on any fliture <br />structural improvements unless existing structure is removed to otfsei any new structure
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.