Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,May 21,2001 <br /> (#2636 GARY AND SUSAN CABLE,CONTINUED) <br /> Smith inquired whether the Applicants would be willin?to consider the addition of those two items. <br /> Cable indicated the construction of the house is completed. Cable stated they reduced the hardcover <br /> down to what they were allowed at the time they built the house. <br /> Berg indicated the need for a sidewalk and paved access to the third stall was discussed at the <br /> November Planning Commission meeting. Berg stated in her view a sidewalk and paved access will <br /> eventually be added on this property,which will brina the total hardcover on the property over the <br /> allowable 25 percent. <br /> Kluth inquired�vhether the City's Ordinances require a front sidewalk and paved access to all garaae <br /> stalls. <br /> Weinberger stated there presently are not Code requirements pertaining to that. <br /> K(uth noted the City did issue a building permit up to the maximum hardcover amount without <br /> allowin'for a sidewalk and additional driveway to the third stall. <br /> Weinberger stated that issue had been discussed at the time the Applicants applied for the building <br /> permit, but since this site plan did meet all the requirements of the City,the building permit was <br /> issued. <br /> Gaffron stated in quite a number of instances Applicants will approach the City with site plans that are <br /> in escess of the allowable hardcover, with Staff workin�with the Applicants in order to reduce the <br /> amount of hardcover and structural coverage being proposed on the property. Gaffron stated Staff did <br /> question the lack of a sidewa(k and lack of access to the third stall of the garage at the time they <br /> applied for the building permit. Gaffron stated the Applicants would be able to place a wood chip <br /> sidewalk to the house if they so choose. <br /> Stoddard stated it is his understanding of the November Planning Commission meeting that they were <br /> debating whether the ice house should remain. Stoddard stated since this application did not reappear <br /> before the Planning Commission,he had assumed the Applicants had taken steps to address the issue <br /> of the sidewalk and access to the garage. <br /> Cable stated at the time they appeared before the Planning Commission,the building permit had <br /> already been issued. <br /> Stoddard stated the function of the Planning Commission is to help insure that the site plans are in <br /> compliance with the City's ordinances. Stoddard stated in his view the side�vaik and access to the <br /> third stall will be added in the future. Stoddard inquired whether the Applicants would be able to <br /> reduce hardcover somehow and provide for a side«•alk to the front door. <br /> Weinberger stated currently the hardcover in the 7�-2�0' setback is under the allowable 25 percent <br /> limit by 46 square feet�vithout the ice house. Weinber�er stated the Applicants could provide a paver <br /> stone system for a front sidewalk rather than a full side���alk. <br /> PAGE 3 <br />