My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-13-1997 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1997
>
10-13-1997 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2023 10:09:37 AM
Creation date
8/1/2023 10:05:55 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.
/
408
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 />I <br />minutes of the orono planning commission <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 15. 1997 <br />Lindquist was informed by Gaffron that no garage would be allowed in this location if <br />proposed today. Lindquist noted the garage is hazardous but questioned approving h. <br />Schroeder inquired about the proximity to the water. GafiGron said the garage had an issue <br />with wetland separation. The lake is more than 75* away. <br />Stoddard questioned if the garage could be built without the 10' front setback from the <br />building to enable the 26* wetland separation. Gaffron noted the distances and said it <br />could not be done. <br />McMillan asked if the accessory structure was grandfathered in. The garage would be less <br />than 26* from the wetland, subject to the same ordinances and would be non-conforming, <br />Lindquist noted the problem with wetland on one side of the garage and the road on the <br />other. <br />Brooks said his hardship is the house located on an island with no additional room to place <br />the garage. There is a main garage. He mdicated a lakeside structure is important for <br />storage. Lindquist informed him that the buildings as proposed could not be built new <br />today. <br />Floyd said he was conceptually in support of the plan. <br />Schroeder indicated that the only compelling reason for approval is the existence of the <br />fence tod^. He felt the fence should be moved back. Brooks said he would amend the <br />plan to place it 10-12* behind the tree line. Gaffron said that distance would be better as it <br />gives screening and a 10' clear zone for plowing and parking. <br />: i <br />I i <br />1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.