My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-21-1997 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
06-21-1997 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/10/2019 2:32:47 PM
Creation date
7/10/2019 2:32:46 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
PDF
View images
View plain text
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 <br />( #4) #2254 CURTIS AND BARBARA PALMER <br />2710 CASCO POINT ROAD <br />VARIANCES <br />PUBLIC HEARING 7:58 -8:07 P.M. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. <br />The Applicant was present. <br />Van Zomeren reported that the application is a request for a variance to allow addition of storage <br />space above an existing garage. The garage is located in front of the principal residence and is <br />therefore non - conforming. Van Zomeren noted the building pad for the property. She indicated <br />that the additional structure would add to the bulk in the non - conforming area. She felt there <br />were other areas where storage space could be added. Van Zomeren said Staff did not find <br />adequate hardship to justify the request. The size of the added storage area would be 5'9" and 16' <br />towards the street side of the garage. <br />Mr. Palmer said the lot was hilly. The garage had been built prior to the current code. He <br />• believe the request is a good way to gain storage space and would be pleasing in appearance. <br />Palmer said the front elevation would allow the roof line to continue its downward slope. <br />McMillan asked how much additional space would be gained. Palmer said it would be about <br />100 -150 s.f. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Smith asked if the applicants were the owners of the property when the porch and addition were <br />constructed. It was indicated that they were. Smith said the property may be a residence where <br />additional changes would result in too much coverage. The applicant indicated that no additional <br />ground cover would occur. Smith replied that the request would result in added bulk too close to <br />the street. <br />Hawn said she originally was not in favor of the request but after viewing the property, she felt <br />the front of the house was obscured by the garage. The houses across the street were also located <br />down a steep decline which makes a significant difference to her regarding the view of the <br />property. Palmer noted that the house next door was more prominent. <br />Smith inquired about the condition of the foundation. The applicant said the apron has settled <br />and pulled away from the garage. <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).