Laserfiche WebLink
To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley <br />Orono Planning Coiiunission Members <br />City Administrator Bernhardson <br />From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator <br />Date: August 8, 1988 <br />Subject: #1316 Gary Barr, 3034 Casco Point Road - <br />Variance - Public Hearing <br />Application - Request for variances to hardcover, <br />setback, and accessory structure floor area. <br />Zoning District - LR-lC <br />structure-to-structure <br />List of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A <br />Exhibit B <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Exhibit <br />Application <br />Plat Map <br />Property Owners List <br />Survey <br />Staff Letter Dated 7/11/88 <br />Plans of Proposed Building <br />Revised Proposal With 3 Alternatives & Staff Notations <br />Staff Hardcover Review <br />Staff Suggested Alternatives <br />Pertinent Facts - <br />1. Hardcover: Based on staff calculations, existing hardcover on the>^^ <br />property is virtually all within the 75-250' zone and is 29.9%. <br />Applicant proposes to remove a backyard area of wood chips underlayed <br />by plastic, for a reduction of 825 s.f. or 3.1%. The other area of <br />hardcover that applicant proposed to remove is not hardcover in <br />staff's opinion, since the only rock in this area is a little bit that <br />has washed down from the steep gravel driveway (area west of garage, <br />between garage and driveway). With Option A, which applicant prefers, <br />the final hardcover is 27.5%. With Option B, final hardcover is <br />29.4%. With Option C, final hardcover is 29.8%. Staff does not <br />understand why Options B & C leave the p^»vement between the two <br />garages in place. Applicant should address >his. <br />2. Setbacks, Structure-to-Structure: Applicant is proposing to construct <br />a second garage that is uphill from but shares the same foundation <br />wall with the existing garage structure. This would result in the <br />structures being considered as attached, creating an accessory <br />structure of approximately 1,700 s.f. footprint area and total usable <br />floor space of about 2,700 s.f. <br />Applicant's Option B would be to move the proposed garage 10' east and <br />setback 8' from the existing garage. He would prefer not to do Option <br />B because he claims he will loose 4 trees and will not be able to <br />reduce the hardcover as much as with Option A. Option C is to mov- <br />the garage 12' east from Option A and maintain a 10' setback to t <br />existing garage and to the lot line. He claims he will loose 7 <br />trees with this scheme.