My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-16-1994 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
05-16-1994 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/11/2023 4:34:16 PM
Creation date
10/11/2023 4:26:35 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.
/
333
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
TO:Planning Comniission McinN^rs <br />Ron Moorsc, City Admimstraior <br />FROM:Jeanne A. Nfabusth. Building & Zcmng Administrator <br />DATK: May 10. 1994 <br />SfBJKCT: #1911 Ernest Lemmerman. 4620 Tonkaview lime - Variances <br />Continuation ot Public Hearing <br />Pertinent Ordinances <br />Refer to staff memo of March 16. 1994, Exhibit A. <br />Ordinance #P6 :™l Scries. Amendniem rcdetlnine topof hluiT. The anicndmem reads <br />" s iha, po.™ on die c.oss section of a bluff helow <br />more th.m IS'J andabove sshich ihe aserage slope lor a disiance ol .10 or more 18 <br />or less. <br />List of Exhibits <br />A - Staff Memo 3/16/94 <br />B - Ordinance #126. 2nd Series <br />C - Sketch of New Building Envelope. Detined by Required <br />Setbacks from Lot Lines and Top of Blutt <br />D - Dimensions ot Building En\elope <br />Status of Application <br />Ai the March 21si mceiing of the Planning Commission, the application was tabled pending <br />resolve of the zoning amendment redefining top ot blutt. Ihe variance inclines of <br />a comnrLnsive application involving a subdivision proposing a realigntitenf ot <br />arniicanfs homestead parcel and Ihe contiguous undeveloped lot also owned by appitc.tm. <br />apStalion for subdtviLn was conceptually reviewed by .he Council and r«c.ved unanimous <br />supptirt. <br />The issue of the bluff impact and required setbacks from bluff were not addressed during ^ <br />mKl vAfoii review In facl the bluff ordinance was not enforced or uiiplenienied until February <br />ihU vear The code section has had a major impact on many ol the lakeshore applicatio^ <br />^omrilmd h, ih': ct rdet-inition for die top of bluff has been amended in an attempi to <br />make it less restrictive. <br />Members are asked to review ll,vbibits C and D We had <br />would allow for a simple visual imeirrciahoh ‘“P “ ^l die 1010 <br />rairrrpet^intm rr-rif* " 'rn ‘Ldmg eieva.lo„ opet. up <br />1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.