Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 17,2009 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (3. #09-3411 DA VID FOX ON BEHALF OF BILL FOX TR USTEE, 1095 FERNDALE ROAD, <br /> VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL IISE PERMIT, 6:58 P.M.— 7:42 P.M, Continued) <br /> Schmidt stated if that corner of the house is pushed north, additional floodplain mitigation would be <br /> required. Schmidt displayed the layout of the lot with the various buildings and illustrated the area of the <br /> property that is located above the floodplain. <br /> Kempf asked if the house could be pushed back any further. <br /> Schmidt stated they would have to review that. <br /> Curtis commented it would likely require additional floodplain and mitigation. <br /> Kempf stated as it relates to the height of the structure,there does not appear to be an issue as it relates to <br /> the neighbor. <br /> Berg asked what the square footage of the house is. <br /> Curtis stated the structural coverage is 4796 square feet,which is the footprint of the house and the <br /> garage. <br /> Berg commented it is possible to reduce the size of the house and garage,which has four stalls. <br /> David Fox pointed out the garage is actually three stalls and not four. <br /> Curtis noted what appears to be a fourth stall is actually a walkway. <br /> Schmidt pointed out there is no basement to this house and that all the mechanicals are required to be <br /> located on the first floor of house. <br /> Kempf asked whether the Commissioners feel this is a substantial amount of house given the close <br /> proximity to the lake. <br /> Kang stated she has a concern regarding the size of the house and the massing affect it would have from <br /> the lake, especially given the close proximity to the water. <br /> Kempf noted there is also a patio consisting of approximately 600 square feet and that under normal <br /> circumstances there would be no structures allowed in the 0-75 foot zone. <br /> Curtis noted the patio consists of 653 square feet. <br /> Kang commented the patio is acceptable to her, especially given Staff's recommendation that the patio be <br /> constructed with pervious pavers. <br /> Kempf stated pervious pavers are recommended due to the close proximity of the structure to the water <br /> but that pervious pavers in his opinion do not count to mitigate the hardcover or to allow more hardcover <br /> than what would normally be allowed. Kempf stated in his view it is a larger patio than what is <br /> necessary. <br /> PAGE 7 <br />