09-15-2008 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING � Monday,July 21,2008 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#08-3367 Tom and Patty Kubalak, Continued) � . percent hard�over. The approved footprint ranged from 2150 to 2370 square feet,with hardcover being • . . less than 30 percent. Gaffron stated he concurs with Planner Turner's recommeudation and that it is � very seldom that the City grants a variance to structural coverage. � Kubalak asked what the city considers reasonable. � Kempf noted he did read the statement from the staff report. Kempf pointed out that if the house were located at the average lakeshore setback, the hardcover could be reduced to 28.5 percent,which in his mind would be reasonable. Kubalak asked what the aveiage setback is from the lake. Turner illusirated the average lakeshore setback line on the overhead. Kempf noted the applicant's house is at the average lakeshore setback line,but that in his view � hardcover at 28.5 percent would be reasonable for this type of lot. Turner stated the statement refers to the squaze footage of the allowed hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone, and if the house were located at the minimum setback from the street, it would allow for a house - consisting of 1545 squa.re feet,which would put it behind the other houses: � ' Kempf stated the 28.5 percent would allow the applicant to locate the house at the average lakeshore �� = setback. Schoenzeit suggested the applicant look at the total lot area and multiple it by the 15 percent structural coverage,which would give them the maximum structural coverage allowed on this lot. .Foan Marquardt asked if the driveway could be constructed out of pervious pavers. � � . Kempf stated the use of pervious pavers has been discussed at the city over the years but that given its . _ . . limitations, pervious pavers would still count as hardcover. . � Kempf stated it appears the consensus of the Planning Commission is that the size of the proposed residence is too large and that the structural coverage should be reduced. Kempf asked whether the applicant would like his application to be voted on tonight or tabled for redesign. Kempf noted the applicant could take his application before the City Council even if the Planning Commission recommends denial of the variances. Kubalak stated he would like to have his application tabled. Kubalak noted the Marquardts were granted a variance for a 1.5 foot setback in 2001 and that he is having some difficulty understanding the issues relating to equality between the two. Kubalak noted he is asking for five feet. Turner noted the Marquardts constructed a second floor addition. � Kroeger stated the two main issues that the Planning Commission is looking at here are the structural coverage and the hardcover. PAGE 5