My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-18-1994 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
07-18-1994 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/18/2023 3:38:54 PM
Creation date
10/18/2023 3:34:58 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
165
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
Zoning File #1938 <br />July 12, 1994 <br />Page 2 <br />List of Exhibits <br />A - Amended Hardcover Facts <br />B - Amended Site Plan <br />Review of Application <br />At your June 20th meeting, the application was tabled providing applicant additional time to <br />revise plan per directives of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission recommended <br />that the garage addition could be located as close as 6 ’ from the street line (42 ’ from traveled <br />road) and thal all improvements must meet the 10 ’ setback from the top of the bluff detmed at <br />the 982 elevation. Hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback was to remain at 1.8% as proposed^by <br />applicant in his original plan. Hardcover within the 75-250 ’ area originally proposed at 3,385 <br />s.f. or 29.7% was to be reduced to between 26 and 27%. <br />Review of Amended Proposal <br />Structure has been moved closer to street. The comer of the garage is located 6 trom the street <br />lot line. Principal structure is located at a minimum 10 ’ from the top of the bluff. The deck <br />at the southeast comer of the residence is located 8’ from the top of the bluff. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. Should the portion of the deck at the extreme southeast comer be adjusted to meet the <br />10 ’ setback. <br />In order to create positive drainage to street, applicant will have to complete certain <br />alterations within the bluff impact zone but this need not involve the alteration of the mp <br />of the bluff and can be completed within the 10 ’ corridor required by Planning <br />Commission at the June meeting. <br />a.Other issues raised by Planning Commission. <br />Options of Action <br />To deny. Members should refer to the necessary fmdings set forth in Section 10.08, Subd. 3(A <br />1-12); or <br />Approval as proposed or amended. Condition of approval should consider the followmg <br />conditions: <br />I. All existing hardcover improvements scheduled tor removal must be completed <br />prior to the footing inspection for the new coiismiction. <br />1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.