My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-25-2002 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2002
>
02-25-2002 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 9:59:44 AM
Creation date
2/9/2023 9:16:42 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 <br />Tuesday, January 22,2002 <br />6:30 o'dock pjn. <br />(MOl-2699 Jay and Kendall Nygard, Continued) <br />Nygard stated he would remove more of the rock garden. <br />Kluth noted although it is unusual for the Planning Commission to approve plans that have been <br />amended prior to the changes being reflected on a final drawing, they have in certain cases done that in <br />the past. <br />Hawn inquired whether the neighbors are fine with this proposal. <br />Nygard stated they are. <br />Mabusth inquired how the Applicant is able to deal with backing out onto Rest Point Road. <br />Nyitard stated he generally backs up into the driveway to avoid having to back out onto the street. <br />Nygard indicated the neighborhood generally encourages everyone to drive slow through this area. <br />Mabusth stated in her view issue number two should be further discussed at the<r next Planning <br />Commission meeting. Mabusth stated she would also like a clarification on overhangs by the City <br />Attorney. Mabusth noted residents are allowed a l.S foot overhang. <br />Hawn stated it was her understanding that had been changed to two feet. <br />Nygard indicated the Planning Commission agreed that it should not encroach into the ten-foot setback. <br />Nygard stated you are allowed two feet of overhang that does not count as structural coverage but it <br />should not encroach into the 10-foot setback. <br />Mabusth stated she would like to know where that 10-foot setback ends, whether it is 8.5 feet from the <br />overhang or from the house. Mabusth stated it was her understanding if the structure met the setback, <br />you were then allowed a 1.5 foot overhang. <br />Weinberger stated that basically is the deflnition. <br />Hawn stated if the Planning Commission does approve the application with the .4 percent increase in <br />hardcover, the Applicant would be required to have final plans submitted reflecting that change prior to <br />the City Council meeting. <br />Nygard stated he would. <br />Rahn stated the Applicant did indicate the square footage would be added towards the front and not the <br />back of the structure. Rahn stated he does not want to see it encroach any closer to the side setbacks. <br />Hawn moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #01*2699, Jay and <br />Kendall Nygard, 1386 Rest Point Road, granting of a variance to permit an addition to encroach <br />two feet into the 10 foot required side yard setback, with the understanding the structural <br />coverage will not exceed the allowable 15 percent, and subject to, one, the Applicant submitting a <br />final plan prior to the City Council meeting showing the additional .4 percent structural coverage; <br />two, a drainage and gutter plan will also be submitted at the same time prior to the City Council <br />PAGES
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.