My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-16-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
04-16-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2012 4:23:19 PM
Creation date
7/24/2012 4:15:32 PM
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.
/
540
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).
View images
View plain text
NIINUTES OF THE ' <br /> ORONO PLANIVING COMMTSSION MEETING <br /> � Monday,March 19,2007 • <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#07-3255 Catherine Sweet, Continued) � <br /> code would not allow the windows in the wall facing the street right-of-way and would limit the eave to <br /> eight inches. <br /> In addition to the garage and shed, 511 square feet of hardcover,including a 120 square foot grade level <br /> deck would be removed. A net reduction of 32 square feet of hardcover would result, all in the 75 to <br /> 250 foot zone. The calculations submitted by the applicant do not include the portion of the driveway <br /> within the side street right-of-way. Customarily this hardcover should be included as if the driveway <br /> were located on the lot. There is approximately 280 square feet of the existing driveway within the 0-75 <br /> foot zone and 820 square feet in the 75-250 foot zone. <br /> Tumer requested the Planning Commission consider the following issues: <br /> 1. Where should the driveway be located? While the driveway within the street right-of-way has <br /> existed for at least 50 years,the property has no formal arrangement with the City regarding the , <br /> encroachment. With the revision required to the driveway at the proposed location,less of the <br /> driveway would be in the side street right-of-way. It would also be possible to place the entire <br /> driveway on the property. Turner noted the sireet has been identified as a possible location for a <br /> trail connection to Three Rivers. • <br /> 2. Is there a reasonable arrangement for the garage without a setback variance? Moving the <br /> garage north not only increases the hardcaver but it also puts it farther into the hill and closer to <br /> Dalcota Trail. Moving the garage south brings the driveway closer to the corner of the house <br /> and sidewall of the house. The overhead door is proposed to be centered in the garage with four <br /> feet on either side. Shifting the door two feet toward the street right-of-way would make it <br /> easier to route the driveway around this corner. A small garage could more easily fit within the <br /> setbacks. <br /> 3. What level of hardcover is appropriate? Hardcover percentages cannot be determined until the <br /> location of the driveway is determined. It is not possible to eliminate the hardcover within the <br /> 0-75 foot zone. <br /> Planning Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: <br /> 1. Approval of a setback variance to allow a garage of appropriate size to be placed ten feet or less <br /> from the west properly line,Uut at least�ve feet fiom this property line. <br /> 2. The portion of the driveway south of the driveway to the tuck-under garage to be on the <br /> property with the unneeded portion of the existing driveway removed. The garage apron and <br /> transition should comply with City standards. <br /> 3. The portion of the driveway within the right-of-way between Crystal Bay Road and the new • <br /> driveway being allowed to remain until the City Council determines the right-of-way is needed <br /> or certain removals occur. This would be formalized in an encroachment agreement. <br /> PAGE 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.