My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-20-1993 Planning PacketC
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
09-20-1993 Planning PacketC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/1/2023 12:13:02 PM
Creation date
11/1/2023 12:06:35 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.
/
394
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
Mabuslh asked applicant if any other landscape areas had geotechnic fabric. <br />Mr. Stinson responded that all landscape areas are lined with geotechnic fabric. <br />Mabusth stated that the fabric will have to be removed as the City of Orono considers the <br />fabric as hardcover and the property is already at greater than 50''/o. <br />Mabusth continued that there is an average lakeshore setback encroachment of 11.5’. The <br />house on one side is 7.5’ from the lot line which requires a side setback variance for new <br />construction. Hardcover excesses exist. The property shares a parking area. There is no <br />hardcover in the 0-75 ’ area. <br />Mabusth asked the Commission where the additional hardcover removals could come from? <br />There have been no comments from neighbors. <br />Rowlette commented that there is an incredible amount of hardcover on the property and she <br />would prefer to hold it at the existing or reduce it. <br />Mabusth stated that hardcover is proposed to increase by 59 s.f. <br />Rowlette mentioned the proximity of homes to one another and the concern about allowing <br />the lakeside addition to encroach into the average lakeside setback with regards to the fact that <br />a new setback is being created which might induce neighbors to want to make the same kinds <br />of vaiiances or improvements closer to the lake. <br />Mr. Stinson brought up the point that his neighbor on the right has no window looking onto <br />his property. <br />Schroeder cautioned that windows could be added to that side of the neighbors home in the <br />future. <br />Mr. Stinson countered that the area is heavily wooded enough that there should be no concern <br />about privacy issues. <br />Nolan concurred with Schroeder and felt that Commission should make the effort to improve <br />the situation ami suggests that applicants review the situation. His main concern is the <br />hardcover rather than the average lakeshore setback. <br />Schroeder stated that he feels the lakeshore setback is a bigger concern. <br />Mr. Stinson a.sked for clarification of the average lakeshore setback. <br />Mabusth explained how the setback is created and that the big concern is w'ith homes or <br />additions being built closer and closer to the lake. <br />Schroeder commented that the home 2 doors down from the subject property along with the <br />subject property could create a new average lakeshore setback and the neighbor between then
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.