My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-13-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
06-13-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/12/2023 9:49:00 AM
Creation date
1/12/2023 9:13:07 AM
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.
/
358
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
L J <br />MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, May 16,2005 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />Jurgens indicated he would prefer to see the specific plan prior to approval. <br />Rahn noved, Kempf seconded, to recommend approval of Application #05-3102, Kathryn <br />Alexander for Stonewood Design/Build, 920 Brown Road South, granting of a 20-foot side yard <br />setback to the north and a 20-foot side yard setback to the south, with the understanding that the <br />footprint proposed to be constructed is the one contained on page two of the handout and should be <br />Identical to that floor plan except with a reverse Image. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 1, Jurgens Opposed. <br />Jurgens reiterated he would prefer to see the specific plan prior to approving it. <br />NEW BUSINESS <br />3. #05-3100 LARRY AND SHERYL PALM, 1146 WILDHURST TRAIL, VARIANCE AND <br />CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 7:24 P.M. - 8:25 P.M. <br />Sheryl and Larry Palm, Applicants, and Blake Duchanich, West Lake Street, Orono, was present. <br />Gundlach stated the applicant is requesting a lot area variance, a lot width variance, and a conditional use <br />permit to allow retaining walls and grading within five feet of the adjoining lot line. Staff has concerns <br />regarding the grading plan for this specific lot and the number of retaining walls being proposed, some as <br />high as 14 feet high. Gundlach stated the concenu deal with the height of the walls as well as <br />maintenance of the walls and the need to construct a swale. <br />Gundlach stated four grading plan? have been submitted, with the City Engineering having reviewed two <br />of them. Staff also has a concern that the current plan does not address construction on steep slopes. <br />Gundlach indicated the City’s code defines a steep slope as “land having average slopes of 12 percent or <br />greater as measured over horizontal distances of 50 feet or more that are not bluffs.” The Planning <br />Commission should discuss whether screening should be required for any retaining walls and structures in <br />an effort to preserve existing vegetation screening as viewed from the lake
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.