My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Project Packet
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
B
>
Big Island
>
620 Big Island - 22-117-23-31-0032
>
Land Use
>
93-1785, SUBD
>
Project Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2026 2:35:20 PM
Creation date
1/29/2026 2:33:39 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
104
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 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />HELD JUNE 15, 1992 <br />(#8) #1745 DAVID R. CARLSON, <br />620 BIG ISLAND - <br />VARIANCES -PUBLIC HEARING -7:50 -8:12 P.M. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mai I ing were noted. <br />David Carlson was were present. <br />Mabusth explained that a bui I ding inspection confirmed that the <br />cabin is constructed on pier footings 16" deep, 7.5' on center, and <br />do not meet existing standards. The ·applicant has submitted an <br />amended plan which maintains hardcover at the existing amo~nt. A <br />setback variance for the 0-75' area would need to be approved. <br />Chair Ke I I ey asked about the condition of the cabin. <br />Mabusth reported that it is not as bad as adjacent structures. The <br />cabin was bu i It in 1963. The app I i cant proposes to rep I ace the <br />roof, siding and windows. She -explained that the applicant has <br />withdrawn his request for a holding tank and has agreed to remove <br />the sink. The structure is under 800 s.f. in area, and per Code, <br />would be al lowed an outhouse if the outhouse is able to meet al I <br />pertinent standards. <br />Chair Kelley said that if the building were being proposed in its <br />present I ocat ion today, it wou Id be den I ed. He asked if the <br />foundation can support the proposed improvements. <br />Mabusth stated that the inspect6r confirmed that ·the foundation is <br />adequate to support the existing structure, but would not comment <br />on any future upgrades to the structure. <br />Bel lows suggested they require certification of the foundation by <br />a structural engineer. <br />Carlson requested that the Planning Commission recommend approval <br />of the app Ii cation with the condition that it be inspected by a <br />structural engineer so the project wi I I not be delayed. <br />Peterson asked if Car I son proposed moving the bu i Id i ng if the piers <br />are found to be inadequate. <br />Carlson reminded him that this is on an island, and it would. be <br />very difficult to make a vertical move. <br />Mabusth noted the structure could be located further back on the <br />property, but wou Id st i I I require interior I ot Ii ne setbacks. <br />variance. <br />1 2
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.