My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-19-1993 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
01-19-1993 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/25/2023 11:42:03 AM
Creation date
10/25/2023 11:38:15 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.
/
205
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
MimjTES OF THE ORONO PLANHirK3 COMHISSlOH MEETING <br />HELD JANUARY 19, 1993 <br />ZONING FILE 91627 - CONT. <br />Rowl«tt« felt they should be given the opportunity to review the <br />property prior to making a decision. <br />Cohen stated he would not approve after-the-fact hardcover <br />Installed within the 0-75’ zone, and agreed with Rowlette that they <br />should be allowed to inspect the property. <br />Chair Bellows indicated the proposal Is based on an engineer’s <br />opinion, not a signed recoesaendatIon by a licensed engineer. She <br />felt If this wera approved they would be allowing a potential for <br />the decks to be rebuilt In the future. She felt the deck attached <br />to the residence is enormous, and she felt that should be reduced <br />to meet the 75’ setback. <br />Anderson stated his client would not object to reducing the size <br />of the attached deck. <br />Chair Bellows suggested tabling the application to allow the <br />applicant time to complete the following: 1) the engineering to be <br />done properly, Including modification of the retaining walls; 2) <br />revise the plans so that any flat area remaining Is not wider than <br />3’; 3) deck attached to cabin to be altered so as not to encroach <br />the 0-75* setback area; and 4) portions of retaining walla needed <br />to support decks to be removed. <br />Johnson asked how much of the retaining wall system was installed <br />to retain the slope versus how much was built to support the <br />decking. He supported the Idea of retaining the slopes that fell <br />In from the storm. <br />Anderson stated he could not answer lhat question. <br />It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Schroeder, to table Application <br />•1627 for Samuel A. McCloud, Big Island Record Lot 22, to allow the <br />applicant time to revise his proposal and submit any additional <br />required documents. Ayes 5, nays 0. <br />Chair Bellows recommended the applicant resubmit his proposal In <br />time for the Planning Commission to visit the property. <br />. a, I I ^ e>riB I if-W"r^i a/ k ii- —- ^Aik. I.A.U
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.