My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-12-1996 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1996
>
11-12-1996 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2023 1:46:53 PM
Creation date
9/5/2023 1:44:49 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.
/
231
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
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 21, 1996 <br />(U6 - #2180 Frank and Peggy Pichelman - Continued) <br />Mabusth informed the applicants that the next review would be November 18. She added <br />that a side stall garage would fit in better with the neighborhood. <br />Schroeder asked if the addition in front of the average lakeshore setback could result in a <br />smaller garage to lessen the hardcover. Mabusth concurred that there would be a possible <br />reduction in the structural coverage. <br />Schroeder moved, McMillan seconded, to table Application #2180 for hirther <br />deliberations of plans for a garage to fit in with the neighborhood and reduce hardcover. <br />Vote Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />(#7) #2181 JAMES NYSTROM, 1745 CONCORDIA STREET - RENEWAL <br />VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:51-8:53 P.M. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing w ere noted <br />The Applicant was present, along with Architect. Gary Frazee <br />Schroeder excused himself from review of this application Haw n chaired the review. <br />Mabusth reported that the renewal variance was approved in November, 1995. and would <br />expire November 27, 1996 The applicant did not feel there was time to begin the work <br />prior to that date and has asked for an extension The approval was tor the razing of an <br />existing residence and construction of a new residence. The property does not meet the <br />1/2 acre zoning standards and proposes a 9-1/2’ side setback at both north and south side <br />lot lines 1 he structure is located in front of the average lakeshore setback, which is <br />impacted by the existing home on property to immediate north that is located 200' from <br />shoreline There are no changes proposed in current application <br />The applicant had no additional comments <br />There w ere no public comments <br />When inquiring about the average lakeshore setbacis., Stoddard was informed by Gary <br />Frazee that there was a problem with calculations when attempting to remodel the existing <br />home It was determined that the best option was to rebuild. The current home and <br />neighbors home were noted to now touch the side lot line.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.