Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,April 18,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3106 Cindy and Brad McDonnell,Continued) <br /> Mrs.McDonnell stated they are willing to reduce a portion of the driveway. McDonnell stated the total <br /> driveway is 832 square feet. <br /> Leslie inquired when the house was constructed. <br /> Mrs.McDonnell stated in 1978. <br /> Leslie commented the safety issues associated with an uncovered entry do not appear to be a high priority <br /> since it has existed for over 20 years. Leslie stated if the Planning Commission is requiring other <br /> applicants to comply with structural coverage,this application is no different. <br /> Mr.McDonnell stated people have fallen on that landing and that the uncovered entry is also dripping <br /> water down by the foundation of the residence. <br /> Mrs.McDonnell stated in her view they do not have an option and that the safety of their children and <br /> other visitors to their residence is a priority. McDonnell commented they do not have many options. <br /> Winkey commented he does not really see a hardship in this situation and that the Planning Commission <br /> needs to remain consistent. Winkey noted the hardcover in the 75'-250' zone is almost double what is <br /> allowed and that there should be major reductions in the hardcover. Winkey commented the main issue is <br /> the structural coverage. <br /> Mr. McDonnell reiterated that a number of people have fallen on this landing. <br /> Winkey stated the area could be shoveled and salted. <br /> Mr. McDonnell indicated the area is wood and is very slippery when wet. <br /> Winkey stated in his opinion the issue is the amount of structural coverage on the lot. <br /> Bremer stated in her view this application is different than an application for a garage due to the safety <br /> considerations,but noted other applicants have been required to reduce their plans down to the bare <br /> minimum in order to comply with the structural coverage limit. Bremer stated she would like to see <br /> further reductions in hardcover,which the applicants have indicated they are willing to do. Bremer stated <br /> she would be in favor of the 76 feet but that aesthetics is not a hardship. <br /> Jurgens inquired whether the applicants are willing to work with the 80 feet. Jurgens pointed out 80 <br /> square feet would allow an 8' by 10' landing,which is easier to construct. <br /> Mrs.McDonnell indicated they would be willing to redesign their plans to meet the 80 square feet. <br /> Fritzler stated in his view a safe covered entryway could be achieved with 76 or 77 square feet and that <br /> reductions in hardcover normally are not exchanged for additional structural coverage. <br /> PAGE 30 <br />