Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 12, 2009 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />Page 5 of 16 <br /> <br />(7. #09-3422 RICHARD AND LEESA ANDERSON, 3205 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD, Continued) <br /> <br />and calculations. The porch is proposed to be set back 6.4 feet from the western side lot line and the <br />living space addition is proposed at a 0’ setback from the eastern side lot line, which is also the municipal <br />boundary between the two cities and functionally the middle of the property as it has historically been <br />used. <br /> <br />The City Council should consider the following: <br /> <br />1. Are there other storm water solutions available to protect the applicants’ home from storm water <br />such as rain gardens, vegetative swales, or infiltration beds? <br /> <br />2. Are the proposed infiltration areas an effort to make up for the excess hardcover rather than <br />managing the storm water? <br /> <br />3. Considering the setback variance and the resulting/proposed 22 feet separation between the <br />proposed covered porch and the neighboring home is the proposed access to light, air, and open <br />space reasonable? <br /> <br />The Planning Commission voted 4-1 to approve the setback variances, the hardcover variances as revised, <br />and further recommended that all new hardcover be pavers for increased permeability. <br /> <br />Planning Staff recommends approval of the setback variances, including approving the illegal deck, but <br />continues to feel that there is too much hardcover proposed. Staff is still a little unclear as to what <br />hardcover is proposed to remain, proposed to be installed, proposed to be removed, etc. The applicants <br />should provide a color-coded version of the survey indicating what stays, what will be new, and what <br />goes so that both the applicants and the City have the same understanding. <br /> <br />McMillan asked if the deck was constructed into the side setback. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated that the deck does not meet the 10-foot side setback. <br /> <br />White asked what hardcover would remain. <br /> <br />Curtis noted 21.5 percent hardcover will remain in the 0-75 foot zone as well as the parking area. The <br />applicants are installing a new sidewalk to access their property from the gravel parking area and have <br />removed portions of a flagstone walk. A portion was added to the walkway in order to access a patio. <br /> <br />Curtis illustrated the two additions to the home that are being proposed. Within the 75-250 foot zone, the <br />applicants are requesting a variance to allow 34.8 percent hardcover. They currently have 44.5 percent <br />hardcover in that zone. <br /> <br />McMillan stated she does not have an issue with the hardcover but that she does have a problem with <br />granting a side setback variance since the deck was constructed illegally in the first place. <br /> <br />Curtis noted the applicants are removing the yellow-colored portion of the deck. <br /> <br />McMillan asked whether structurally that is easier to do rather than remove the entire portion that is <br />located within the side setback area. <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda - 10/26/09 <br />Approval of Council Minutes 10/12/09 [Page 5 of 16]