My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-17-2004 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2004
>
02-17-2004 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2023 11:14:32 AM
Creation date
1/26/2023 11:06:49 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.
/
335
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, Jinutry 20.2004 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />Gary Rotler. 3280 Watertown Road, the neighbor on die west side, stated that he had a diHicult <br />time seeing the building site on the back lot <br />Oaffioa pointed out that the buildable site was tucked in against a 4S* setback from the uest lot <br />line, between the creek setback and wetland. <br />Mark Summers. 7S Crystal Creek Road, pointed out that his home fell 60* north of Watertown <br />Road and 7S-100* west of the property and he, too. was concerned with the placement of a home <br />on lot one. <br />Steve Koehler, 3S Ciystal Credc Road, questioned the site on die hill, diiming that this location <br />would be much closer to his property than the alternate home site. <br />Henderson stated (hat the most attractive building site for any potential homeowner would be the <br />site in the back versus the one up boat on the hill. <br />Oaffton pomted out that the location of the septic site would likely drive where the house building <br />site would be. He agreed that the hill side site would be difficult, u the septic lines would have to <br />run 1 long distance and across the creek bed. While he felt this to be an unlikely building site, he <br />noted that the applicant could feasibly build there, or agree not to build on the steep slope <br />Hoiderson agreed, stating that the hillside location would not likely be a desirable one, and <br />indicated that they would consider Use suggestioiL <br />Koehler uked what the location for die outiot and setbacks for the drivxway were bemg proposed <br />at <br />GafGrofl stated that the outlet would be a IS’ wide drivewiy corridor that narrows. He noted thet <br />(be driveway wu placed merely 5 ’ from the lot line and questioned whether the outlet should be <br />wider or whether the driveway widiin the outlet oflset <br />PAGE 29 of 64
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.