My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-11-2003 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2003
>
08-11-2003 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 8:43:48 AM
Creation date
2/8/2023 2:36:04 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.
/
240
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, May 19,2003 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />(#7 #03-2893 JOHN AND ROBERTA HENRICH, Continued) <br />Rahn stated that the Conunission would ask the applicant to remove the old shed in the 0- <br />75 ’ setback and replace it with a lockbox. <br />Henrich stated that he believed the steep grade provided them with adequate hardship to <br />also keep the shed. <br />Hawn concurred with Rahn regarding the shed. <br />While Gafiron stated that, if money was not an issue, someone could change the grade, the <br />access, and the entire character of the property to mi^e the design conforming, he <br />questioned whether that should be the goal of the Conunission. He added that parking is <br />an issue for residents along Highwood and the added space they have serves a use to the <br />neighboriiood. <br />Chair Smith questioned whether the necessary changes to make it conforming would <br />require exorbitant amounts of fill. <br />Galiron indicated that it would require a lot of All to change the property, which, in turn, <br />could create drainage issues. <br />Bremer questioned how cutting the size of the home down to meet requirements would <br />work. <br />At merely 1600 s.f., Henrich maintained that cutting the house down an extra 100-200 s.f. <br />would not impact hardcover significantly, but would impact their livability. <br />While he did not feel the size of the home to be an issue, Rahn felt that other removals <br />were warranted. He su^ested that they remove the shed, design a smaller deck, and <br />remove some of the driveway hardcover. He agreed that tht topography of the property <br />presented a hardship. <br />While she concurred, Bremer stated that they would need to be clear that it was the steep <br />elevations that presented the hardship, unlike the Toth’s whose project warranted a basic <br />redesign. <br />Rahn stated that, short of regrading the entire topography of the site, they could not <br />redesign the application. <br />Hawn encouraged the applicants to find additional hardcover removals. <br />PAGE 26 of 39 <br />.1 . <br />I 'I <br />i
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.