Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR APRIL 10, 2000 <br />0 <br />*4. #2543 Ted Edin, 3025 Casco Point Road—Variance—Resolution No. 4436 — <br />Continued <br />Flint moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4436 granting variances <br />to <br />municipal zoning code section 10.03, subdivision 14 (C); section 10.22, subdivisions 1 <br />(B) and 2; and section 10.56, subdivisions 16 (C) (6) and 16 (L) (2). <br />Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />*5. #2551 Thomas Randgaard, 2765 Shadywood Road — Conditional Use Permit — <br />Resolution No. 4437 <br />Flint moved, and Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4437 granting a <br />conditional use permit per municipal zoning code section 10.55, subdivision 9 (B). <br />Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />6. #2564 William Dampier, 3550 Ivy Place— Variance <br />The applicant was present. <br />Gaffron stated that the applicant wanted to add a two -story entryway addition and a • <br />second floor expansion to the existing residence. The first -story walls and foundation <br />would remain. The issues facing the application include the side setback. The minimum <br />requirement for side yard setback is 10 feet. There is currently a 2.9 -3.4 foot setback on <br />the west side of the house. The addition would continue the existing substandard side <br />setback. Lakeshore hardcover within 75 -250 feet of the shoreline should be no greater <br />than 25 %. Currently the hardcover is at 55.4 %. The proposed changes to the house <br />would reduce hardcover in that zone to 48.9 %. Also, the lot coverage allowed is 15 %. <br />The current house is at 16.8 %, and the proposed changes would increase lot coverage to <br />18.7 %. The deck on the lake side of the house has a railing that extends over 6 feet above <br />the grade, hence the entire deck is counted as lot coverage. <br />The Planning Commission reviewed the application and recommends denial of the <br />application primarily because of the lot coverage issue. Since the Planning Commission <br />meeting, the applicant has presented several options for changing the deck so that it <br />would not be considered structural coverage. One potential solution requires a <br />conditional use permit to build a retaining wall within a foot or so of the side lot line to <br />create a terrace that would reduce the drop from the deck to 30 inches or less. <br />Kelley stated he would prefer to table the application so it can go back to the Planning <br />Commission or move on it as it stands. Dampier stated he was willing to return to the <br />Planning Commission. <br />0 <br />4 <br />