Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 17, IW <br />(#S > #1987 Lmy Pillar - Continued) <br />The Applicant was present <br />M^busth reported that the applicatiem tnvoh^ a 10^15' additkHi to the mr a home <br />that was instafled without a buildii^ permit The apphcaitt's intention was to repair <br />sections of the foundation of the three-souon porch, winch also provides an intoior <br />access to the basement vea, and found he nceM to replace foimdations, the wood fiaine <br />walls and rot>f The addition was rebuilt within the origin^ enve lope. AppKcant advised <br />that he has been working on thb profect for a few months <br />The inspectors isaied a stop work order, and applicant was advised of the need fbr a <br />buildif^ permit and survey The sinvey leveaM the porch was 47” fhMn the side lot line <br />The house is 4' Iran said line There is a 14* unimproved alley which sqwiites applicaiit's <br />fiom the property to the i»rth. if the alleyway was vacated, this pit^)erty would receive <br />the benefit of the eventual 14* wide alley <br />Lindquist nroved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #1987 to include a penalty fee <br />for not havii^ acquired a buiidii^ permit and tind addition be completed within 90 days. <br />Ayes 7, Nays 0. <br />!l was noted that the shed on the property was not found on the survey and is located on <br />the property line. The vacating of tlK alley would solve this problem. <br />(M) #19St KENNETH J. SEVERINSON* 2800 SHADYWOOD ROAD • <br />VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING > 8:404:50 P.M. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were nofed. <br />The Applicant was present. <br />Mabusth reported that the application is fm* a setback variance required for reinstaliation <br />of new wetions, 6-7 in height, of a privacy fence adjacem to the soulhw^ channel side <br />and street side of the property. The original fence continued approximately 8* fiuther <br />along the duumet than the new fence The Applicant said he was unaware of the need for <br />a permit It was discovered after 78*4 of the fence had been replaced. The fence is in the <br />0-75* zone and is not considered hardcover. <br />The Applicant said the noise level of the area without the (nivacy fence is vary loud and is <br />part of his harddiip statemem. Peterson and Smith were concerned with approving a <br />fence here and settii% a precedent for oclwrs to ftdlow as a reason to grant a future <br />request for fencii^. <br />There were no public comments.