10-16-2000 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 18,2000 (^2611 Maryb McCarty, Continued) City Staff is reconunending approval of the easement vacation and relocation to the south 15 feet of the property subject to the condition that the City of Orono receives confirmation from all utility companies agreeing to the easement relocation. There were no public comments regarding this application. The Applicant had no comment regarding his application. Stoddard stated he does not have a problem with the application. Kluth inquired whether it is likely that all the utility companies will agree with the easement relocation. Weinberger stated he does not feel there will be a problem. Weinberger stated this application will not proceed forward to the City Council until confirmation is received from all the utility companies. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2611, Marlys McCarty, 225 Tonka Avenue, vacation of easement and relocation to the south 15 feet of the property subject to the condition the City of Orono receives confirmation that all utility companies have agreed to the easement relocation and the new easement is granted in favor of the City of Orono prior to recording the easement vacation. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#9) #2612 DONALD MACMILLAN, 2550 FOX STREET, VARIANCE, 10:37 p.m. - 10:42 p.m. Dan Johnston, Contractor, appeared on behalf of the Applicant. Bottenberg stated the Applicant has requested a variance to permit the construction of a 40 by 40 foot accessory building between the principal structure and the street. The accessory building is proposed to be one and a half story, with the half story being a loft. The accessory building will be used for storage. The lot is approximately 350 feet wide and 900 feet deep. The Applicant ov ns the front lot and is in the process of combining them as one parcel. The residence sits on the rear of the property approximately 700 feet from the street. A variance is needed to allow the accessory’ building to be located nearer the front or street lot line than the principal building on that lot. The proposed location for the accessory building is already prepared due to a different accessory structure which was located there until 1997. The lot is wooded and the location would not require any trees to be removed. Bottenberg indicated a number of trees currently exist on the lot which w’ill screen the accessory structure from the street and adjacent properties. Bottenberg noted the accessory building meets all setback requirements for the RR-IB zoning district and the square footage of the building meets the size restrictions of the oversize accessory structure ordinance. PAGE 25