Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File /I^1839 <br />July 8. 1993 <br />Page 3 <br />Revie>^ of Application <br />Please review the enclosed staff memos of May 17ih and June 21st. The original <br />application seeking approval of the 2-story 20’ x 28’ addition was unanimously approved by the <br />Planning Commission. Major concerns raised during the review was the need for natural <br />screenin'! to buffer exterior yard storage from adjacent residences. Members of Council may <br />rememb-jr in 1987, applicant appeared before the Council to appeal violations of exterior yard <br />storage dealing with the parking of commercial vehicles and other building materials within the <br />residential property. The condition of the yard has been greatly improved over the years as <br />applicant has planted trees within the street and side yards in an attempt to screen the existing <br />accessory structure and parking area. One neighbor to the south of the property appeared before <br />(he Planning Commission at the May meeting and voiced concern with the condition of the yard <br />during the winter months when existing vegetation failed to screen the yard. <br />Planning Commission members noted that the existing accessory structure was still not <br />completed and advised it would be difficult to '•ecommend approval of new construction until <br />former improvement projects were completed. Members also noted that upon their inspection, <br />a large truck and commercial vans were parked at the property. Applicant advised that a large <br />truck was her son ’s who lived in Spring Park. The only member of the household involved in <br />construction was her one son who drove two vans allowed by Orono code. The Planning <br />Commission ’s recommendation of approval at the May meeting was conditioned as follows: <br />1.Existi.ng detached garage currently under construction was to be completed before <br />a building permit can be issued for the second accessory structure. <br />2.The second accessory structure was to be completed before building permit could <br />be issued for addition to residential strucmre. <br />3.Landscape plan to be presented for Council ’s review with type and schedule of <br />plantings. <br />4.Driveway and parking boundaries were to be physically defined on property in <br />order to elimiriate uncontrolled parking of vehicles on grassed area. Approval <br />was based on the hardships noted by applicant as follows: <br />a. <br />b. <br />c. <br />d. <br />Unusual shape of lot. <br />House located on lot prior to existing zoning setbacks. <br />Principal suaicmre met zoning standards at the time of construction in <br />1969 and was allowed to be constructed 25 ’ instead of 30’ from the rear <br />lot line. <br />Interior layout of house limits construction of addition to the west side. <br />I <br />I <br />1