My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-22-2003 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2003
>
09-22-2003 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 8:45:01 AM
Creation date
2/8/2023 2:54:04 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.
/
470
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
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8,2003 <br />(3. #03*2919 Kevin & Deborah Thompson, 90 Myrtlewood Road, Continued) <br />greenhouse attachment. Perhaps the greenhouse could go elsewhere on the property, but <br />the existing garage and new pool house must remain 10 ’ apart from each other. <br />Deborah Thompson was present to answer questions. <br />Mayor Peterson surveyed Council on the setback variance: Council approved of it. <br />Murphy stated that future applicants could point out the present application as a precedent <br />for less than a 50 ’ setback, but stated he did not have a problem with the setback. <br />On the accessory structure: Mayor Peterson stated that the applicant was asking for 2009 <br />s.f. where 1000 s.f. was allowed. Gaffron stated that the Plarming Commission was <br />concerned with the visual impact of the building, and that it would look massive with a <br />70’ long facade that sits at the entrance to Orono. He stated they w anted screening along <br />the pool and building. <br />Murphy asked how the applicant would feel about moving the greenhouse. Mrs. <br />Thompson stated they would be fine without the greenhouse structure. Their intent was to <br />connect the buildings for aesthetic reasons. She added that they calculated the total <br />building at 2000 s.f, and she did not know where the extra 9’ came from. Mayor Peterson <br />stated that the connected building would not pass Council and the structures would have <br />to be built as two separate buildings. <br />On the variance for the pool to be located 15 ’ from the side road setback: Council <br />approved of a 15 ’ setback. <br />On the vegetation screening: Gaffion stated that Planning Commission wanted the view <br />along the south boundary to be softened with year round vegetation, like a half-dozen pine <br />trees. He stated staff could work with the applicants. Mrs. Thompson stated that they had <br />already put screening along the south boundary and would be willing to add more. <br />Mayor Peterson asked if the applicant would fence in the pool. Gaffron stated a fence <br />would be an option, but the City did not ha\ e a code requiring it. They typically direct <br />people to their insurance carrier. Sansevere suggested they some day visit the issue of <br />fencing pools. <br />On the plumbing of an accessory structure: Gaffron stated that the plumbing would be <br />connected to an e.xisting septic system. Designs are based on the number of <br />bedrooms'people on a property, not the number of fixtures in the buildings. Council <br />approved of the plumbing. <br />Saosevere moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. S035 granting a <br />variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28 Subdivision 5(B) to allow <br />4 of 11 <br />it <br />I <br />M
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.