My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-15-1985 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1985
>
07-15-1985 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2022 2:08:35 PM
Creation date
12/1/2022 1:47:44 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
181
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 ORONO PIJ^NNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 1905. FAGE 2 <br />H876 ASPLUND <br />(Cont.) <br />Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the City <br />Engineer did look at the proposed dock with wood and a sand <br />base. Gaffron noted that with certain construction <br />techniques and no plastic underneath it could be, <br />technically considered non-hardcover. Gaffron explained <br />that the City Engineer's point is that the deck may beginwith <br />a sand base but a future owner could easily put plastic down <br />underneath and it would become impossible for staf f to police <br />such a condition. <br />Sime explained that the City has not identified exactly what <br />is hardcover and that the City has always considered decking <br />as hardcover. Sime explained that the City has just <br />recently begun changing its philosophy regarding hardcover <br />if decks are constructed in a manner so to allow water to <br />penetrate the ground with sand base. <br />Chairman Callahan suggested that the Planning Commission <br />address 3424 Eastlake Street first. <br />Taylor asked if the screened porch is proposed at ground <br />level. <br />Randy Asplund stated that the screened porch is negotiable. <br />Asplund noted that it could be placed on the second floor but <br />would prefer it to be ground level. <br />Kelley asked the status of Outlot B. <br />Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that <br />Outlot B is shared by all three homes. Gaffron noted that <br />Outlot B is where the shared driveway is located along with <br />the shared mound septic system. <br />Randy Asplund stated that Outlot B could be a legal problem. <br />Asplund stated that they are paying taxes on Outlot B and not <br />to be able to consider Outlot D as part of their property does <br />not seem fair. <br />Taylor asked if staff charges half the driveway to 3424 <br />Eastlake Street and half the d: iveway to 3444 Eastlake Street <br />since it is a shared driveway. Taylor stated that there <br />appears to be a fair amount of square footage measured back to <br />the 250' line and could extend the 250' line through Outlot B <br />and credit both parcels and redo hardcover calculations. <br />Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that Outlot B was set <br />aside for various improvements such as the shared septic <br />system and shared driveway access. Mabusth stated that <br />these homes wore granted setback variances to construct new <br />homes or the lots. Mabusth noted that this was a political <br />compromise to get the commercial marina use away from the <br />residential district and that a definite compromise w’as made <br />with this property. <br />( <br />:• ■ <br />i
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.