Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,January 22,2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#01-2699 Jay and Kendall Nygard, Continued) <br /> Hawn inquired how much hardcover the driveway consists of in that zone. <br /> Weinberger stated the driveway is almost 900 square feet, which would be between 15 and 20 percent of <br /> the entire hardcover of the lot located within the 75-250' setback area. <br /> Nygard stated he does have approximately a 50-gallon drain trap located in the driveway which does <br /> help alleviate the drainage in this area. Nygard noted the structural coverage being requested is 14.6 <br /> percent, and inquired whether he could increase the structural coverage by.4 percent. Nygard stated he <br /> understands his lot would then be considered fully built and that no other increases to structural <br /> coverage would be allowed. <br /> Nygard stated he is agreeable to removing the plastic and rock, and would be installing gutters on the <br /> house as well as drain tile to help alleviate the drainage. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Hawn stated typically the Planning Commission only approves the plan that is in front of them,noting <br /> the Applicant did request he be allowed to increase the structural coverage slightly. Hawn noted the <br /> hardcover on this lot is well over the allowable 25 percent, and questioned whether a hardship really <br /> does exist. Hawn stated the Planning Commission generally considers a hardship to be imposed by the <br /> land itself,but in her opinion a hardship may exist since the house was constructed prior to current <br /> zoning ordinances. <br /> Mabusth stated the comments by Hawn are consistent with the Planning Commission's <br /> recommendations in the past. Mabusth stated this application could be tabled which would give the <br /> Applicant a chance to bring a revised plan back before the Planning Commission. Mabusth stated she <br /> personally does not have a problem with the application, and inquired what the current overhang is. <br /> Weinberger stated the current overhang is under one foot. <br /> Mabusth stated she did not observe any overhangs on the other part of the structure. <br /> Nygard stated the overhang is one foot total. <br /> Mabusth stated it was her recollection the survey showed a three-foot overhang. <br /> Nygard stated the surveyor may have assumed a standard three-foot overhang, which is incorrect. <br /> Nygard stated he does not have a problem removing the request for the extra .4 percent structural <br /> coverage,noting he originally added his numbers incorrectly. <br /> Mabusth stated typically the Planning Commission likes to see the final plan before approving any <br /> increase in structural coverage. <br /> Nygard stated he basically would extend the addition one foot. <br /> Hawn inquired whether he would be willing to remove a little additional hardcover. <br /> PAGE 2 <br />