My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-17-2003 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2003
>
03-17-2003 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 1:37:33 PM
Creation date
2/9/2023 1:36:26 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.
/
229
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 />Wednesday. Fcbniar>’ 19,2003 <br />6:30 o'cIiKk p.m. <br />(M03-2867 DAMKL ADAMS, Continued) <br />hardcover variance would still be required to allou this amount of hardcover in the 0-75* <br />setback zone. <br />Bottenberg staled that the rest of the existing residence, garage, and drix eway are located <br />in the 75-250* setback zone and constitute 37^'o hardcover in this /one. She pointed out <br />that, while the driveway on the property is fairly c\lensi\c and accounts for a large anu>unt <br />of hardcover, the circle driveway may be appropriate to assist the residents in backing out <br />onto Tonkawa Road. There could be other areas of the driveway near the garage and <br />gra^'el area to consider for removal. <br />With regard to the average lakcshorc setback, .ioitenberg indicated that the existing <br />residence is located 17* into the average lakeshore setback, which v\ouId not change vviih <br />the addition and dormers. WTiilc the existing topography suggests that the addition would <br />not be w ithin the visibility of either neighboring property or encroach on any existing view <br />of the lake. Bottenberg maintained that an average lakeshore setback variance would be <br />required. <br />Bottenberg reviewed the issues for consideration and stated that if the Planning <br />Commission felt the existing conditions of the residence and property created a valid <br />hardship that supports the variances requested, then a recommendation for approval would <br />be appropriate, otherwise further direction should be given <br />Chair Smith stated that she was hesitant to recommend driveway removal if this made <br />backing out onto Tonkawa Road more hazardous. <br />Alexander pointed out that, while the new plan shows the new screen porch outside the U- <br />75* setback zone, the applicant would prefer to build the porch as originally submitted. <br />There were no publie comments. <br />Bottenberg pointed out that there is an additional deck near the water, covered by snow, <br />which she could not ascertain its condition. <br />Alexander passed around an aenal photo w ith the deck near the water. <br />While she felt the applicant’s design made sense. Chair Smith noted the numerous <br />opportunities to reduce hardcover on the propertv. <br />Alexander slated that the site is dilTiculi to work with and difficult to maneuver by car. <br />Mabu.sth indicated that she had noticed that the loop had not been plowed and didn't seem <br />to be used much <br />PAGE 5 of 26
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.