Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ' ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, October 20, 2003 <br /> • 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#2) #03-2952 GREG TRIPP, 3229C CASCO CIRCLE, Contirtued <br /> ��rmers, and aestheticaliy improve the desibn, subject to the removal af all landscape <br /> plastic and liners, as well as, removal of the side wood walkway. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays <br /> 0. <br /> (#5) #02-2858 SCOTT STANDA, 2659 CASCO POINT ROAD, VARIANCE, 6:13 - <br /> 6:43 P.M. <br /> Scott Standa, the Applicant, was present. <br /> Gaffron explained that the applicant was requesting after-the-fact hardcover and setback <br /> variances to allow the reconstruction of a rotten deck located at the shoreline attached to an <br /> existing accessory building. Variances required include: <br /> 1. Structure within 0-75' setback zone, extending out over the shoreline <br /> (cantilevered 2-3' past the OHWL). <br /> 2. Structure encroaching within 1 foot of side lot line. <br /> 3. Hardcover in 0-75'zone of 16.24% (no changes proposed). <br /> 4. Encroachment of average lakeshore setback <br /> Gaffron noted that the deck that was replaced was attached to a 12'x22' accessory building <br /> located 5' from the shoreline and nearly abutting the side lot line. The accessory building <br /> has been there for many years and has apparently been maintained in relatively good <br /> condition. <br /> Gaffron asked the Planning Commission to consider 5 key issues: <br /> 1. Would the Planning Commission have recommended approval for the replacement <br /> of this deck had the application been made before the fact? <br /> 2. Does Planning Commission agree with staff that the 1992 photo provided by <br /> applicant casts doubt as to whether this deck was 8' deep prior to its replacement? <br /> 3. The property has excessive hardcover in both the 0-75' and 75-250' zones. Is there <br /> any hardcover on the site that should be considered for removal if the application is <br /> approved? The surveyor identified 235 s.f. of landscape areas lined with plastic or fabric <br /> that are not included in the hardcover calculations and would be subj ect to removal if the <br /> application is approved. <br /> 4. Applicant paid the after-the-fact fee for the variance application. If the variance is <br /> approved, should an after-the-fact building permit fee be paid? Applicant claims he was <br /> unaware that he needed a permit to replace an existing deck on the property. <br /> Page 3 of 29 <br />