My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-13-1993 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1993
>
09-13-1993 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/12/2024 2:00:56 PM
Creation date
1/12/2024 1:57:43 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.
/
313
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MKETINC; <br />HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 <br />ZONING FILE - CONT. <br />Mabustli explained sometime in 1991 cxisiinc decks were repaired and (he 160 s.t. of deck <br />expansion was completed. <br />Gerald Sieff reiterated that within the 0-75 ’ zone, which seems to be of most concern, they <br />propose U) reduce hardcover to 0% plus the rose beds and the concrete slabs which arc over 3 <br />limes the area. <br />Chair Schroeder asked if the driveway could be a viable reduction. <br />Gerald Sieff replied there is no way to change the driveway because the neighbor uses it. If <br />we take out the driveway, the neighbor won’t gel out unless she puts more hardcover in <br />between our two driveways at a lower place. He tell they are being victimized because the deck <br />was put up without his mother’s consent or notice by her fonner hu.>band. <br />Chair Schri>eder explained it has nothing to do with personal relationships but is an attempt to <br />reduce hardcover at the margin. We think you have made a good start. The shed is an <br />important removal in the 0-75 ’ setback and the plastic is something the City supports. <br />Smith suggested if applicants feel strongly about having two driveways, perhaps there are some <br />opportunities to make tradeoffs in tenns of the deck or ponions ol it instead of simply removing <br />plastic. <br />Chair Schrocdei stated the excess is considerable in the 75-250 ’ setback area and we are trv ing <br />to suceest a few alternatives to remove more. <br />Gerald Sieff felt that the impression he is getting is they liave a choice to either remove 160 ot <br />deck or over 500 ’ of other hardcover. <br />Mabusth clarified in cases where excesses in hardcover exist on a propeily, the improvements <br />would have required variance approval for structural repairs to existing decks not just tor the <br />expanded deck area A problem for applicant is that you credit all hardcover the same. Does <br />he want a letter from (he neichbor claiming a hardship if they remove that section of driveway? <br />Smitli offered suggestions to remove the planters altogether and have the deck stop at that point <br />Mrs. Sieff asked if you are just talking alumt removing the timbers
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.