My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Project Packet
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
B
>
Baldur Park Road
>
1428 Baldur Park Road - 08-117-23-34-0059
>
Land Use
>
82-695, VAR
>
Project Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/2/2025 9:22:31 AM
Creation date
10/2/2025 9:20:28 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
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
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 18, 1983. Page 5 <br />ROTH (CONT) Mabusth noted that there already was an existing <br />ga, age there. <br />Goetten noted that her direction at that time in 1982 <br />was to keep the garage on the house side of the street. <br />McDonald noted that the wetlands are very fragile to <br />bui Id by and asked Mr . Fi sk i f Mr . Roth woulc' consider <br />putting the the garage on the house side. <br />Mr. Fisk noted that Mr. Roth wanted it on the other side <br />and that there probably wasn't enough room on the house <br />side of the street. <br />Goetten noted that Mr. Roth was going by the direction <br />of the majority opinion of the Planning Commission but <br />it was not one she shared in. She noted that she still <br />has the same concern than she did in 1982. <br />McDonald would like to ask Mr. Roth if he would put it on <br />the house side. <br />Callahan asked if they moved the garage on the main <br />structure side, would they need a variance? <br />Mabusth stated that they would because of the 30' <br />setback requirement. <br />Callahan asked if the hardcover situation would be <br />better if the hardcover in question is o%.•,- r where the <br />house is and if it is closer to the wet l ands as it now <br />is. <br />Mabusth stated that it probably would be. <br />Sime noted that there is an existing structure there <br />now approximately the size proposed now, and it would <br />seem that they have not chan3es anything that is <br />existing by approving his request in this location, <br />that he is just replacing one garage with another and <br />that it would remove an eyesore. <br />Mabusth noted that the proposed garage is .a little <br />larger than the existing one. <br />Adams statotl that since the applicant has complied <br />with the .,riginal recommendation of the Planning <br />Commission .and that they should approve it, but to <br />allow a little more flexibility by maybe moving the <br />garage a few feet back. But that he would also invite <br />the applicant to consider building a ,garage on the <br />house side. He stated that this way the Planning <br />Commis: if-,n would be 91vin<1 the irpl i^_ant the <br />fl i h i I i t y to gr, ahead and ic, what the PIannin.1 <br />!' i ssi -,n et ited .it in ear 1 i.-r t imp. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.