My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-13-1998 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1998
>
04-13-1998 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2024 1:54:18 PM
Creation date
6/5/2024 1:50:01 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.
/
354
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
\ <br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON MARCH 23, 1998 <br />(#17 - #2348 Mary Jane Hauser - Continued) <br />Bressler informed Goetten that the driveway as revised would result in 25.9% hardcover <br />in the 75-250' setback or 25% if the driveway came straight out. <br />Jabbour was informed that the 0.9% of hardcover constitutes 283.7 s.f Hauser voiced <br />his objection with reducing the home or driveway any further. <br />Goetten commented that the house had been removed and policy is for no variances for <br />new construction. Hauser reiterated the problems that would be caused if the driveway <br />was changed. <br />Jabbour noted that a new curb cut would require approval, Hauser said that is the <br />hardship. Jabbour acknowledged that the .pplicanl had a hardship but said it does not <br />address the need for a large residence. Jabbour did not believe the driveway could be <br />relocated and suggested the house be reduced in size. <br />Hauser asked what rules a^e used for relocation of a driveway. Jabbour said sight lines <br />are considered. Hauser asked to see the rules. <br />Peterson asked if the house was redesigned and garage was located on the south side, <br />whether this would rec.uce the hardcover to accommodate ihe concerns. Hauser set that <br />plan was reviewed. It would require a large amount of fill. <br />Hiuser said he felt he has a legitimate land use issue noting other hardcover variances <br />have been granted. <br />Peterson noted the size of the south deck, 429 s.f, and spa deck, 280 s.f. Bressler <br />indicated the amount of hardcover over the allowed amount is 287 s.f Jabbour also <br />suggested rounding the corners or the driveway. <br />Jabbour asked if the applicant would liKe the application tabled or moved. Hauser asked <br />for the Council to take action as he would not require a variance if he removed the deck <br />as suggested. <br />Peterson moved, Jabbour seconded, to deny Application #2248 because of new <br />construction, and the proposal could meet all setbacks and hardcover requirements <br />stipulated within the code. She would support the application if hardcover was met. <br />Goetten suggested the deck be removed. <br />Hauser said he felt he has shown hardship. <br />Vote: Ayes 4. Nays 0. <br />23
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.