My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-08-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
08-08-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/12/2023 10:39:55 AM
Creation date
1/12/2023 10:15:44 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.
/
293
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 CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, July 25,2005 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />(10. 005-3133 BRUCE AND EUZABETH NUSBAUM, 3490 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, <br />ConttmueO) <br />While the garage sits 3.5* off the side yard, Nusbaum noted that any more than 5’ would obstruct <br />the view from die house. A plan which was designed ^leciflcally with a garage in the same <br />footprint or location was approved by the previous Council. <br />The builder, Ross Langhans, stated that the building inspectors stated they could likely gamer an <br />additional 1>1 */a’ from the overhangs. <br />Sansevere noted that, typically, staff includes a recommendation with an application; which this <br />seemed to be lacking. <br />Gaffron stated that due to so many variables, staff found it difficult to make a recommendation; <br />however, a 10’ side setback would be preferable to a S’ one. <br />Murphy suggested the applicant consider a higher pitch to the roofline in order to allow more <br />storage space above. <br />Lanidtuu stated that they had designed the garage to match the home. He pointed out that the <br />survey and staff reports do not clearly identify the fact that the garage sits within two zones. <br />Nusbaum pointed out that a 22 ’X22 ’ garage is 484 s.f., as opposed to the 440 s.f as recommended <br />by the Plaiming Commission. He added that, several years ago when they had built their home, the <br />minutes will reflect that the City Council gave them permission to build a garage in the same <br />footprint as the current one. <br />Sansevere stated that he wished to see a 10’ setback no matter if the garage was a single or 1 '/i <br />story structure. <br />Marphy awvcd. White seeoaded, to adept the Plaaniag ConmissfcHi recomncadatloa with a <br />10* sMc setback for a 22*X22* garage whether constructed as single or t *A story stractare for <br />the garage located at 3480 North Shore Drive. <br />Mrs. Nusbaum asked why they were not going to be given the 5* option. <br />Murphy stated diat the City Council failed to identify a hardship to the land to support the 5’ <br />option. <br />VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />*11. «05-3137 ROBERT AND VICTORIA JAFFRAY, 340 BARftETT AVENUE - <br />VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 5362 <br />Marphy aatved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5362, a Resolatioa <br />graatlag a front yard setback variance for 540 Barrett Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0 <br />PAGE 5 of 10
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.