Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, July 18, 2011 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />Thiesse stated the hardcover requirements are primarily to protect the lake and that the water in this area <br />will not be going into the lake. Thiesse stated he would understand if they had to come back for a <br />hardcover variance . <br />Feuss stated that ultimately is their choice. <br />VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. <br />LANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS <br />REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING C <br />OUNCIL MEETINGS ON JUNE 27, 2011, AND JULY 11, 2011 <br />e attended the June 27th City Council meeting and all item s were placed <br />Levang stated she att ded the July 11th meeting and reported that the Whippl pplication that was <br />approved by the Planni Commission variance was not approved by the C Council. The Whipple <br />property is located on Cas Point Road. <br />Curtis displayed the proposed g <br />Levang stated the issue with the Cou ii was what the garag ould be used for and that the Planning <br />Commission did not explore that at all · h the applicatio . <br />Thiesse noted he did ask what the garage wo d be d for and that in hi s view there was no practical <br />difficulty to ask for a garage of that size. ated the Planning Commission did not discuss it <br />beyond that . <br />Curtis stated the conversation of the Plan <br />Levang stated the garage would be d to store antique car nd as such would be a luxury. The City <br />Council did not feel the hardcove as reduced enough . The ·!Y Council also talked about a deck <br />located out front but was not di ussed in great detail. <br />the lakeshore side of the home in the 0- <br />Levang stated shew d like to use this as a learning tool in the future sot City Council does not <br />overrule the Plann · g Commission on other similar applications . Levang note the application was <br />eventually table . <br />that applicant has submitted a revised plan today requesting 30 percent h <br />1ficant in the driveway and a slight reduction in the size of the garage. <br />As · relates to the issues with the 0-75 foot zone and the nonconforming structure, Council M <br />served on the Planning Commission before the statutes were changed. If the City requires th <br />emoval of a nonconforming structure, the City would be required to compensate the property owne