My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-27-1986 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1986
>
10-27-1986 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/20/2026 10:48:49 AM
Creation date
1/20/2026 10:42:28 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.
/
246
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
Zoning File #1070 <br />September 12, 1986 <br />Page 2 <br />Note that if the slab is more than 2' frcm the lot line, as a <br />slab only it is a non -encroachment, but is considered a structure <br />requiring a permit. If a garage is built on it, it is definitely an <br />encroachment into the side yard setback, needing a variance. <br />Applicant claims that this is the only feasible site for a <br />garage, given the topography and septic location, unless ma-i - amounts <br />of fill and grading are done. The septic tank certainly d impact <br />the location to a degree, and any work past the existing 5 _.rop-off <br />will likely affect the drainfield. <br />However, considering the extent of work done to create a flat <br />parking area with poured concrete all along the 5-foot drop-off and a <br />concrete ramp to the lower level, it seems to me that better planning <br />could have allowed the garage to be placed directly south of the house <br />with no encroachment on the setbacks, but this would have eliminated <br />the use of the single existing tuckunder garage. <br />The neig}:-)oring property owner, Bruce Dayton, has written a note <br />f approval of the -,rage location. Staff remains unconvinced of the <br />actual lot line 1r.%-Lion behind the garage. <br />Dr.'nage from the property is generally tL, the east and south at <br />the garage location. It appears that the swale between the properties <br />is abo. t 10' into Dayton's lot. The additional run-off onto Dayton's <br />lot as result�f--tire=gauge is minor, and gutters along the rear of <br />the garacye woul require t e added run-off to virtually none. <br />Staff Recommendation: <br />Given the site condi . _ons prior to the slab construction, staff <br />feels that there are better alternatives for a garage on this site, <br />but none which still allow ready access to the existing garage. With <br />the extensive site work recently done (i.e. concrete slabs next to the <br />5' drop-off), it seems that a 24x24' garage could be placed directly <br />south of the house, opening to the west. <br />Please view the garage <br />sitE <br />possible. Do you find any <br />justification for granting the <br />side <br />jack variance for <br />the garage on <br />the existing slab? If you do <br />approve <br />this, staff would <br />recommend an <br />updated survey prior to construction, <br />showing the actual <br />lot line and <br />verifying the setback to the slab. <br />Pr 9- (,, `��o <br />1 <br />'� �P..L� P�}DIN �� <br />1 > �' u�t U�" <br />1 y t•r� � f y�NC� �,_.F E <br />/ 7 GGA--; -,! <br />2� ST�ff`�pP <br />c t �.,��.�T 7-„ �eeVe <br />F v� For< r'•-�.r, rt of <br />A t, n-,w-*,14 T-t` C C>cA -r 7 "-' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.