My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-11-1997 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1997
>
08-11-1997 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2023 9:00:11 AM
Creation date
8/1/2023 8:53:40 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.
/
296
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 MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR JULY 21,1997 <br />(#6 - #2256 James and Mary Rivers - Continued) <br />There were no public comments. <br />Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2256. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. <br />(#7) #2257 DENNIS A. MEYER <br />4685 TONKAVIEW LANE <br />VARIANCE <br />PUBLIC HEARING 8:08-8:20 P.M. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. <br />The Applicant was present. <br />Gaffron reported that although the memo indicates the need for both lot area and lot width <br />Yankees for construction of a new residence, only lot area is required. The 0.69 acre property <br />h^ 82,0 of the 140' standard which is satisfactory. Gaffron noted that the survey, elevations, and <br />plans are provided. The new residence would meet the 35' front setback, 10* side setback, and <br />hardcover requirements. The northern two-thirds of the lot is within the 500-1000' lakeshore <br />setback. <br />^ffron said the applicant was asked to submit a grading plan because of drainage to the south <br />^e drainage runs to a property also owned by Meyer. The drainage issue needs to be resolved. <br />The applicant is willing to work with Staff and City Engineer. Gaffron noted that the plan was <br />revised to eliminate a height variance. Staff recommends approval. <br />The applicant said he plans on building a larger home than his current one. <br />During public comments, the neighbor to the west indicated that a fence line he has maintained <br />h^ been determined to be located 8' into the Meyer property which includes the driveway <br />Meyer said there is an overlap of the plat and driveway area. He has no intention to remove the <br />fence or change the perceived boundary. Berg informed him that this issue would have to be <br />resolved by the two property owners. Lindquist asked if there was any conflict. The neighbor <br />said he had not surveyed the property when he purchased it. Schroeder said the boundary change <br />would require a lot line rearrangement. Lindquist said the Planning Commission would only act <br />on the application requested and informed the neighbor to work with Meyer to resolve this <br />boundar>' issue. Meyer said he was willing to work with his neighbor.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.