My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-16-1996 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1996
>
01-16-1996 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/7/2023 2:51:34 PM
Creation date
9/7/2023 2:43:21 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.
/
411
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
Zoning FUe #2103 <br />January 11, 1996 <br />Page 5 <br />Paric Commission at their February meeting. This matter may best be addressed by the Park <br />Commission. <br />The exterior finish of the structure will be very similar to the exterior finishes of the existing <br />school structure. The lower portion of structure will be of exposea masonry veneer brick and <br />upper levels of the strucnue will be of an exterior installation finish system similar to that of <br />the Orono City facility. The roof will be metal much like the City buildings. <br />Land Use <br />Review Exhibit L-1 (R-IA code), note the various high impact/intense uses allowed within the <br />residential districts via a conditional use permit. <br />Staff does not believe there is a suitable or existing fit for the proposed use within the code. <br />If the use is to be reclassified as an accessoiy use under the principal use, what happens when <br />the property is no longer owned by the School District but is purchased b> the Hockey <br />Association or another entity? Review Exhibits Dl-8, option to lease agreement states that <br />lease may be written for a 35-55 year period but during that time it may be possible for the <br />Hockey Association to purchase the property. How is the use to remain an accessory use when <br />there is no formal connection to the School District? <br />What is a reasonable setback for a 160’x240' proposed ice area from an adjacent residential lot <br />line? The setback standards for existing conditional uses range from 50' to 150*. Note the <br />school conditional use setback is 50'. No fiuther discussion on die use as this is to be resolved <br />at your 9:00 p.m. public hearing. <br />Need for Variances <br />It is difficult to determine the exact number of variances when we have yet to determine an <br />exact fit in our code for the proposed use but variances will be required per existing code <br />sections. <br />Review Exhibits G and H, we will be dealing with a height variance as the structure exceeds <br />the allowed 30' of height. Topography along the west lot line will minimize the impact of the <br />structure upon the residential property*. Review your west elevation, the structure is 28' above <br />finish grade. Note the cuts into weste.m elevation in the southwest comer. Land alteration <br />(unless drainage swale) must be located 10* from a lot line. <br />The parking lot shown at a 20' setback from the street lot line would require a variance, refer <br />to Exhibit L-6, top of page 384, "Open parking spaces on lots must have a location other than <br />a required yard except that such parking may be located in a rear yard to within 10' of an <br />1 <br />5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.