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
r <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR JULY 21,1997 <br />(#19 - #2270 Marcia and Kenneth Hickey - Continued) <br />Van Zomeren said additional information is required for completion of this application and <br />recommends tabling. The applicant would like the Commission to receive an overview to give <br />them direction. The property on Tonkaview is considered a through lot, but no access from that <br />through lot. The proposal is to build a garage requiring a conditional use permit due to the <br />through lot status. The structure is proposed at 1200 s.f. where 1000 s.f. is the limit allowed. A <br />height variance is required as the residence is lower than the proposed garage. Van Zomeren <br />indicated that an oversized accessory structure requires a farther side yard setback than what is <br />proposed and is planned to be located in front of the principal structure. Staff recommends <br />tabling the application due to lack of sufficient survey information. Van Zomeren said she did <br />not feel the lot size is a problem but would like to see the hardcover calculations included on a <br />worksheet. She asked for Commission direction. <br />Kenneth Hickey said the location was chosen due to the topography of the property. There is a <br />large slope on the west side that creates runoff problems for the neighbor. They plan on angling <br />the structure for a turnaround to be able to pull straight in. <br />Lindquist asked if there was a reason why the 1000 s.f limitation could not be met. <br />Schroeder said he would require hardcover information. He did not have a problem with a 10' <br />side yard setback. <br />Hickey said the height is to create a loft area. The principal structure is only 13’ high. The <br />applicant said he is willing to adjust the size to 1000 s.f and a 20’ height. <br />Berg was informed the building would not be hidden. She said she felt the height was a little <br />high. <br />Lindquist said a 25-26' height would be satisfactory. <br />Schroeder said he would probably not have a problem with that height but the neighbors should <br />be informed. <br />Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2270. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.