My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-21-2015 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
09-21-2015 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2019 2:23:25 PM
Creation date
1/13/2016 8:59:50 AM
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.
/
418
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 <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 17,2015 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> during the permit review and construction process. <br /> The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. <br /> Jon Ressler, Applicant, stated he is the third generation in his family to be living in this residence. <br /> Ressler stated with the guidance of Staff,they have attempted to stay within compliance as much as <br /> possible. Ressler noted this is a pretty small piece of property but that they wanted to do an improvement <br /> to the total structure. Ressler stated in his view the modifications are meaningful while also being <br /> mindful of height giving the existing setback. <br /> Ressler noted the property line that runs to the east does not go parallel with the house and that it was not <br /> the easiest to follow the setback. Ressler stated they have spent a number of years planning in order to be <br /> compliant and respectful to the neighbors. <br /> Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. <br /> Landgraver noted Staff raised the issue of whether the second story should be modified to meet the side <br /> requirement. Landgraver asked Staff to give some context for this regulation. <br /> Curtis indicated the lot is narrow and the house is almost property line to property line. In an effort to <br /> reduce massing and not overshadow a neighboring home, it is not uncommon for the City to allow a <br /> second story. Curtis stated in an area where there might not be sufficient space between this house and <br /> the neighboring property, it is not unusual to have it jog into the house or the setback to give more space <br /> and less of a feel of massing. Curtis stated architecturally or structurally it is a challenge for some house <br /> conformities but that it was included in Staffls report as a piece for consideration if the Planning <br /> Commission felt it would be appropriate. <br /> Curtis displayed a picture from the lake of the house and property. Curtis noted the two homes at the end <br /> of the road are both two-story homes and the applicant's home is situation between two one or one and a <br /> half level homes. <br /> Leskinen stated her only question related to the hardcover. Leskinen asked if it possible to mitigate the <br /> 188 square feet of hardcover by removing some hardcover elsewhere on the property. <br /> Curtis stated there appears to be a large parking area on the side of the garage but noted there is no on <br /> street parking available, which is likely why the parking area exists. Curtis stated there is also a slope that <br /> goes up to the county road,which may be the reason why the applicant has more of a Y driveway. <br /> Leskinen stated what the applicant is proposing is reasonable. <br /> Lemke stated he did view the property and thought that it is a lot of house for the property and that what <br /> they are proposing to be too much. <br /> Page 7 of 43 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.