My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-25-1991 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
1990-1996 Microfilm
>
1991
>
11-25-1991 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/26/2024 12:40:35 PM
Creation date
7/26/2024 12:38:13 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.
/
256
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
r>ir <br />?■ i'' i' <br />r:i <br />.ii', <br />ht' <br />^ ■ <br />^1 <br />*’ ■'* <br />0' <br />(*■:,' <br />I'fc '•■' <br />T'-':•!. ' <br />/■f <br />f’.- <br />I;;I-: <br />•t/ <br />1: •i •« <br />N'- <br />'-/4 <br />MINUTII OF THI FIQULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING - NOVEMBER 12. 1991 <br />APPLICATIN #1682 > CONT. <br />Butler felt that It was most unfortunate that the applicant did <br />not ask questions prior to pouring concrete. She noted that even <br />If the previous garage was in the exact same location, the new <br />garage must meet all pertinent setbacks. <br />Gaffron noted that a garage over 750' s.f. must meet 15‘ setbacks <br />from the south, west and east lot linos. He noted that a smaller <br />garage could be constructed meeting 10' setbacks. <br />Jabbour felt this project too ambitious for this lot and noted <br />that the applicant doesn't necessarily have the right to a larger <br />garage. He noted that in a few months there may be new rules <br />even more restrictive for lakeshore lots. <br />Mayor Peterson felt that they all agreed the applicant does not <br />need a home occupation license. She noted the next Issues to be <br />resolved. <br />Goetten asked if there was any way the garage could be moved to <br />allow it to remain and still keep it in conformity with codes. <br />Gaffron noted he didn't see how. He noted that <br />conform, it would have to be made smaller and <br />different location. <br />to make it <br />moved to a <br />Jabbour stated that the garage could possibly be reoriented on <br />the lot to conform. He asked if the fire code came into play with <br />this application. <br />Gaffron noted that is li/vely not an issue because the buildings <br />weren't close together, but If it did, firewalls could be <br />required. <br />Brickley noted that the garage was constructed at a size of <br />21x32'. <br />Gaffron noted that makes the garage less than 750' s.f., and 10' <br />setbacks would only be required, which eliminates the issue of <br />encroachment on the south side but It still remains for the west <br />side. <br />Butler explained to the applicant the reason for Orono's <br />hardcover regulations. She felt the original gahage size was <br />too much for this substandard lot. <br />Brickley noted that If the garage were to be smaller, she would <br />have to reinstall the two sheds which had been removed to storge <br />all her belongings. <br />Butler noted this would not be acceptable as it adds to the <br />hardcover percentages.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.