Laserfiche WebLink
� 1VIIlVUTES OF THE . <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,June 20,2011 � <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> 1. Can the existing foundation support the additions? Should an engineer's opinion on the <br /> foundation be required? .. <br /> 2. If the foundation cannot support the additions and the project becomes a total rebuild,does the <br /> scope of the project change? Should the Planning Commission review the application again? <br /> Should the home be moved to the conforming location on the property? <br /> 3. Does the Planning Commission find that the property owner proposes to use the property in a <br /> reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br /> 4. Does the Planning Commission find that the variances,if g ranted,will not alter the essential <br /> character of the neighborhood? � <br /> 5. Does the Commission fmd it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts <br /> created by the granting of the requested�setback variances? _ <br /> 6. The survey illustrates an existing encroachment into the property to the west with a paver patio <br /> area. Should the encroachment be removed in conjunction with the request? <br /> Planning Staff recommends the following: . <br /> 1. Approval of the front yard setback variance to construct the connecting addition between the <br /> garage and the home; <br /> 2. Approval of the principal structure side setback variance resulting from the connection of the <br /> garage and home; <br /> 3. Approval of the front yard setback variance for the covered porch as proposed; � <br /> 4. Approval of the second story additions over the existing home and the new connecting addition; <br /> 5. Denial of the front yard setback variance in order to re-locate the eastern, front door and stoop <br /> and fiu ther recommends that the door and stoop be removed from the plan altogether; <br /> 6: Denial of the front and side yard setback variances to construct the shedlgarage addition; <br /> 7. Removal of the patio encroachment into the property to the west; and <br /> 8. Require an engineer's opinion to determine whether the existing foundation is able to support the <br /> additions as proposed prior to City Council review of the request. <br /> Thiesse asked why Staff is recommending against the location of the shed. <br /> Curtis stated the property allows for a number of conforming locations for the shed and it is not integral to - <br /> the garage. Curtis noted the garage is existing. <br /> Page 9 <br />