My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-22-1993 Council Minutes2
Orono
>
City Council
>
1993
>
02-22-1993 Council Minutes2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/13/2024 11:05:14 AM
Creation date
2/13/2024 11:01:39 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.
/
296
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 REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD FEBRUARY 8, 1993 <br />ZONING FILES #1768/#1786 - CONT. <br />Mayor Callahan understood there Is a large volume of traffic on the <br />property. <br />Toenges chirifled that the applicants do entertain frequently and <br />Dr. 0mlle must have easy access from the property In the case of <br />an emergency. <br />Jaobour felt the Island may create more of a hardship In <br />maneuvering the driveway. <br />Kelley stated this Is a classic example of overbuilding on a lot. <br />He noted they proposed five garages, and suggested that one be <br />eliminated. He said planning for this property should have been <br />done prior to application for the permit. <br />Jabbour noted It is up to the applicants to demonstrate a hardship <br />for the granting of the variance. He felt the applicants created <br />the hardship. <br />Toenges stated the hardship has always existed with the access onto <br />the County Road. <br />Mayor Callahan suggested the family Is too large for the lot. <br />Larson Indicated a portion of the hardcover percentage is landscape <br />areas underlain with fabric. He added, the retaining wall and <br />slopage benefits the lower area and the lake by slowing erosion. <br />Mabusth noted staff Issued the building permit and later realized <br />the need for steps which had not been Included, which Increased the <br />approved hardcover by .2*. <br />Goetten stated the appiI cants have made a good faith effort to <br />reduce their proposal. She reiterated a turnaround drive is safer <br />for access. She noted there is no Increase In the 250-500 <br />hardcover. She inquired whether the fabric under the landscape <br />areas could be removed. <br />Larson stated that could be elImlnated which would reduce the <br />hardcover by ipproxImateIy 250 s.f. <br />Jabbour reiterated his approval oi^ the original driveway design <br />approved with the building permit, and felt, if the applicat on is <br />approved as proposed, would set a negative precedent. He felt the <br />project is 100* aesthetic and 0* safety.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.