My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-14-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
03-14-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2023 3:56:44 PM
Creation date
1/11/2023 3:38:54 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.
/
241
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
northeast. Mann stated in his <br />roperty line than 16 inches. <br />s property. <br />l by Paul Phillips. <br />»crty is located. <br />ist from their property. <br />I. <br />attempted to relocate the lean-to in a location that would be complying with the setbacks but that she has <br />encountered problems with the fence line, the wooded area, and safety of the horses. <br />Rahn commented in his view the lean-to appears to be very large. <br />O’Rourke stated the lean-to was designed to cover two paddocks. <br />Rahn stated in his opinion the lean-to could be relocated but that it may involve re-orientating the fence <br />line. Rahn Indicated the most important issue he has with this application is the neighbors who have <br />purchased plats of land and have researched the City’s requirements prior to con.struction to find out if <br />they are in compliance and then are now faced with a situation where they have a structure located very <br />both miniature and full-size, <br />* owns a .small stallion which <br />> have these areas of separation <br />ended by the veterinarian that <br />poisibic. O’Rourke noted she <br />oded area require tiie shelter. <br />s be maintained I ritzier noted <br />be possible that the fence could <br />s applicants consider two <br />unable to conform to the <br />y outside the paddocks. <br />'ould be located too close to tlic <br />etbacks should be complied <br />on the property. <br />hich is a temporary situation. <br />D’Rouike |)ointcd out one of <br />Ic. O’Rourke st.itcd she has <br />(#05-3077 Barry and Robin O’Rourke, Continued) <br />close to the property line. Rahn stated those property owners have a right to expect that no structures will <br />exist in the 0-75’ area. <br />Mr. O’Rourke indicated they have spoken with the neighbor who is directly behind them. <br />Saiisevere inquired whether the lean-to could be located halfway between its current location and the <br />bam. <br />Mr. O’Rourke stated that would not be 75 feet from tlie property line. <br />Mrs. O Rourke stated they would be able to relocate the lean-to closer to the barn but probably not <br />halfway. O’Rourke Indicated they could locate the structure approximately 45 feet from the property line. <br />Jurgens commented horses do tend 'o hurt each other if they are confined close together. Jurgens inquired <br />what the setback requirements would be for a storage shed. <br />Curtis stated tJie setbacks would depend on the size of the structure. <br />Jurgens noted the lean-to appears to be less than 1,000 s(|uare feet but more than 750 square feet. <br />Gundlach stated that size .structure would require a 15-foot setback. <br />Jurgens stated he has gathered from the comments of the neighbors that they do not want to sec tlic <br />structure, but noted the applicant does have a right to construct a storage shed the same size 1 5 feel from <br />the property line and jii.st not house horses in it. <br />Curtis staled the strucUiie should also be located 150 feet from the neighboring homes. <br />Rahn noted a storage shed would probably need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission since Uierc <br />are already other structures on the property.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.