My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-16-2018 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2018
>
07-16-2018 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2020 8:22:23 AM
Creation date
1/14/2020 3:56:33 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
321
PDF
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, June 18, 2018 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />5. LA18-000055 PAUL VOGSTROM, 2709 WALTERS PORT LANE, SKETCH PLAN, <br />6:49 P.M. — 8:07 P.M. — Continued <br />Hueler asked if that solves the view setback problem. <br />Curtis indicated it does not. <br />Hueler asked if the view setback problem was partially caused by the house being removed and building <br />the addition they did. <br />Thiesse stated it was. <br />Erickson commented that periodically you see cul-de-sacs where the middle of it is landscaped, which is <br />an option. <br />Libby stated it can essentially be a turnaround that feeds in and out, which is kind of a middle ground that <br />the Planning Commission is looking for. <br />Ressler suggested the developer look at ways to make the plan come together more agreeable for <br />everybody. <br />Vogstrom stated people have had a change of heart, which has made it difficult. <br />Ressler stated at the end of the day, the City of Orono wants to see demonstration that he is trying to <br />make it more agreeable. <br />Vogstrom stated when they presented the sketch plan, everybody loved it. <br />Curtis stated she does not think that is accurate. <br />Vogstrom stated everyone agreed it would work. <br />Thiesse noted there was a house there at the time, which is no longer the case, and that the situation has <br />changed. <br />Vogstrom stated they have spent countless hours in meetings trying to make everyone happy. <br />Erickson asked if there would be a risk from the standpoint of the City in creating a second back lot. <br />Curtis stated in her view there would be. Curtis stated the City has a rule for back lot situations where <br />there is not enough width to create two frontage lots that are conforming but where the area is exceeded. <br />Curtis stated there are some standards to be met due to the sensitivity and unique character of a back lot <br />because someone's front lot is someone else's back yard and there is a shared driveway. The City will <br />allow for that to happen once in a development but not on multiple lots. <br />The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item. <br />Page 18 of 21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.