My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-20-2000 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2000
>
03-20-2000 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2023 3:51:26 PM
Creation date
3/16/2023 3:45:54 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.
/
218
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 PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,1999 <br />(Mike Hilbelink/John Vogt, Continued) <br />septic, perk, and tot sizes. <br />Hilbeiink stated as it relates to access, he is unsure whether an easement or an outlet would be <br />better in this situation due to the topography of the land. Hilbeiink stated the bam is an existing <br />structure and would be a nice asset to the property. <br />Hawn inquired whether the bam could be relocated. <br />Hilbeiink stated that is a possibility which they have not considered. <br />Weinberger commented the bam has been moved once before. <br />Lindquist commented the Applicants will need to find a place for the bam where it will meet all the <br />required setbacks, noting he does have a problem with the bam in its present location. <br />Stoddard commented that the City prefers outlots to private driveways to avoid any possible <br />conflicts that may arise between the property owners. <br />Hawn stated that the Applicants will need to address the issue with the bam further to try to avoid <br />the need for a variance. <br />Lindquist suggested the Applicants pursue an outlet rather than a shared driveway. <br />Weinberger stated the bam would be considered an oversized accessr*''^ uuilding. <br />Hawn commented that it appears some members of the Planning Commission wou.. tot be opposed <br />to the bam as long as it meets the setbacks. <br />Smith inquired whether the bam will continue to be used for horses. <br />Hilbeiink stated that seems to be the appeal of the bam and probably will continue to be used for <br />that purpose. <br />Weinberger stated it may be possible to place a curb cut on Watertown Road but would be subject <br />to approval by the City. <br />Hawn suggested the Applicants continue to work with City Staff to resolve any disputed issues. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS <br />(#14) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION <br />Hawn inquired whether the Planning Commission would prefer to meet on Wednesday in January <br />and February. <br />Lindquist stated he would be able to meet on Wednesday if there is not a quorum available on <br />Monday. <br />It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to schedule the January and February meetings <br />on the third Wednesday of the month for January and February. <br />Page 26
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.