My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-22-2008 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2008
>
01-22-2008 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2012 8:04:26 AM
Creation date
7/27/2012 8:04:18 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
FILE 08-3338 � <br /> January 22,2008 <br /> Page 4 of 4 <br /> edges of the two doors are no more than 20 feet apart or the two doors are combined into one. <br /> The proposed evergreen lxees within the right of way are also governed by regulations that <br /> are not part of the zoning code. That request is still being evaluated. <br /> Gradin�: It appears that the middle section of this property and the adjacent property <br /> partially drain toward Crystal Bay Road. Unless the applicants can gain permission from the <br /> adjacent property owner to create a swale to direct this runoff toward the lake,drainage will <br /> need to be directed around the garage toward Crystal Bay Road. This can be partially <br /> accomplished with gutters. (There will be no roof drainage into the area with the reduced <br /> setback.) � <br /> Each part of the request should be considered separately. Staff recommends that the <br /> Commission first consider if the proposed addition is necessary to alleviate a hardship,then <br /> if there is any other way to satisfy the need that would eliminate or reduce the need for a <br /> variance. . <br /> Next the Commission should consider the proposed additions' impacts on and compatibility <br /> with the surrounding neighborhood. Thought should be given to possibilities for lessening <br /> the impact and improving compatibility. In particular Staff suggests the Commission ask the <br /> Applicants to confirm that the front of the porch will be entirely open and consider if the <br /> porch could be partially recessed into the structure and if"wood" columns would appear less <br /> massive than the proposed brick or stone column. <br /> Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> • � Staff Recommendation - <br /> Planning Staff recommends: <br /> A. Approval of the setback variance for the attached garage, subject to: <br /> , 1. No additional hardcover in the 75 to 250 foot zone. <br /> • 2. Unless the wider driveway approach is approved by Council, the outer edges <br /> of the garage doors being no more than 20 feet apart. <br /> B. Denial of the lakeshore setback variance for the second floor open porch but approval <br /> of a deck. <br /> C. Approval of the setback variance for the open entry porch, subject to the porch being <br /> partially recessed into the structure and "wood" columns being substituted for the <br /> brick or stone columns. <br /> D. Approval of the hardcover variance to allow the steps and grade-level deck within the <br /> 0 to 75 foot setback. <br /> A revised grading plan and corrected hardcover calculations�would be required before <br /> City Council consideration. � - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.