Laserfiche WebLink
Fo;Orono Planning Commission Members <br />Mavor Callahan and Orono Conpcilmembers <br />Ron Moorse, Citv Administrate; <br />From: <br />Date: <br />Subject: <br />Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator <br />August 5, 1993 <br />^1842 Tom and Sheila Browne, 760 South Brown Road - Variances - Resolution <br />Additirnal Exhibits <br />L - DNR Letter of July 23, 1993 <br />M - Staff Sketch of Improvements Allowed With Planning Commission <br />Recommendation <br />Brief Review of Application <br />The Brownes seek multiple variances for structural intensification, additions to the <br />existing principal structure and an accessory structure for a property now classified as a <br />lakeshore lot (review Exhibit G). The property is zoned RR-iB and applicants have maintained <br />a 26 ’ setback from the former wetland that existed in the eastern portions of the property. The <br />wetland is now classified ;is Tanager Lake, a Recreational Development lake, at the 929.4 <br />elevation. All structural improvements are proposed within the 100 ’ structural setback area from <br />Tanager Lake. Please review the enclosed packet and staff memo prepared for the Planning <br />Commission review. <br />The Planning Commission was advised of the DNR’s conceptual review of the application <br />asking that no new structures be allowed to be installed closer to lake than existing deck and <br />recommended that if the deck/pool structure at 20 ’ x 26 ’ was approved that the existing cement <br />court area be removed. The DNR specifically asked that a naniral vegetation buffer be retained <br />along the banks adjacent to Tanager Uike (review the DNR written report. Exhibit L). <br />The applicants advised that the bank areas are covered with a natural vegetation and have <br />never been disturbed or m;ide into a lawn area. The Planning Commission advised applicants <br />that this was a very difficult application to consider as most of the existing improvements were <br />approved b;ised on the former regulations. All new structures proposed were in violation of new <br />Shoreland Regulations. They agreed to support the DNR recommendations and approved the <br />following structural improvements (please refer to Exhibit M): <br />A. 816’ X 7’ upper level deck area to be enclosed now as part of principal structure. <br />B. Screen porch to be installed over existing deck but refused to allow the <br />encroachment closer to Tanager Lake. <br />C. 162 s.f. of new deck adjacent to screen porch strucnire.