My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-22-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
11-22-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 3:39:26 PM
Creation date
1/25/2023 2:21:44 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.
/
361
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, November 15,2004 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />Rahn stated he has reviewed what has been discussed at the past meetings, noting that the middle third of <br />this lot consists of a lake. Rahn stated in his opinion it is a hardship lot and it should be grunted some <br />variance at a level determined by the Planning Commission. Rahn stated in a typical lakcshore scenario. <br />if the 4,100 square feet were dry land, the application that has been submitted would be within the 25 <br />percent. Rahn noted two-thirds of this lot lies within the 0-75' area. <br />Rahn inquired whether the lot is undersized and whether a lot area variance is also required. <br />Curtis stated the lot is 80 feet wide, with the area of the lot meeting 80 percent of the requirement. <br />Rahn stated he would not be opposed to .15 percent hardcover on this lot. <br />Bremer stated she feels the reductions being proposed are good and that the present plan is a much more <br />reasonable plan. Bremer indicated she likes the proposal to shill the new house from the side lot because <br />it reduces the number of variances required. Bremer stated she does not have a problem with the average <br />lakcshore setback variance given the location of the property. <br />Bremer stated given the si/e of the driveway that is required and the available fiK>tprint, hardcovei of <br />2,824 square feet is probably below what would normally be requested and is in line with the rest of the <br />neighborhood. Bremer stated in her opinion it is a hardship lot and .she would be open to suggestions <br />concerning the amount of hardcover. Bremer inquired whether any Commissioners had any ideas for <br />where the hardco\ er could be reduced further. <br />Fritzler stated he would prefer the hardcover be reduced even further. Frilzler staled in his opinion the <br />property owner has not done enough to try to build within the restrictions and that he would like to see the <br />hardcover at 25 percent. Fritzler indicated he does not want to see the hardcover increase in the ne.xt few <br />years from what is approved tonight. <br />Leslie commented that consideration should be given to the fact that the proposed hardcover calculation <br />now includes a driveway where the old hardcover number docs not include a dnveway. Leslie noted <br />there is u three-car garage and inquired whether the garage could be reduced to a two-stall garage in an <br />PAGE 2
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.