My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-20-1995 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
11-20-1995 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/5/2023 10:44:03 AM
Creation date
10/5/2023 8:44:35 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.
/
433
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).
View images
View plain text
MINU I ts OF THt ORONU PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 20, IW5 <br />(#5 - ^2088 VVintleld Stephens - Continued) <br />Christine Valerius reported that she ovsns the properly they were referring to and noted <br />that the WicUands use the driv eway but that there was no easement in favor of this <br />property She said she looked when she purchased the property and found no easement. <br />Stephens reported on the attorneys who had searched the title and showed Valerius a copy <br />of the easement <br />Peterson said there were other concerns with the garage encroachment and clean up of <br />area to the west Gardiner said a boat had be-m there and rubbish left by previous owner <br />of l.andmark property. <br />Lindquist asked if any improvements involved the tearing down of the garage located on <br />the alleyway Stephens said he had no plans to do so Lindquist said he could not <br />approve any improvements w ith the garage in that location if the vacation was not <br />approved. <br />Berg said it was important to make sure the easement exists She added that she did not <br />feel the Commission could proceed to approve any improvement without the alley <br />v acation. Peterson agreed that this would be an integral part of the application <br />Peterson said he fav ored option ti I and the v acation and asked if the survey (1988) <br />commented on the alley Mabusth said there has been no new construction to require a <br />new survey. <br />Lindquist said the variance should be based on whether or not the vacation is granted. He <br />was not in favor of any furiher encroachment of the west side yard. <br />Smith commented that the addition was very aggressive and could not take a position <br />without a decision on the alleyway. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Gardiner remarked that the connection charge to City sewer was $13,000 and would be a <br />very expensive sewer for a I bedroom house. Gardiner said that is why it should be <br />expanded and noted that the neighbors had expanded. The Wickslands commented that <br />their lot was 1-1/2 acres, and they had to sacrifice a large tree in order to meet building <br />setbacks. <br />Stephens was asked if he planned on living in the house and was told he did.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.