My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-19-2001 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
11-19-2001 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2012 2:25:58 PM
Creation date
2/27/2012 2:25:58 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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,NOVEMBER 19,2001 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#01-2722 Michael and Monica Brown,Continued) <br /> Weinberger stated the Planning Commission had reviewed this application at its October meeting and <br /> tabled it to allow the property owner to consider options to the site plan in relation to garage size and <br /> setbacks. Weinberger stated Brown Road is considered to be the front property line and Minnetonka <br /> Avenue being considered the side yard adjacent to street. The Applicants are requesting variances to <br /> permit the replacement of an existing garage with a 28' by 24' detached garage. <br /> The Applicant is now proposing to construct the same size garage as originally proposed with the <br /> location of the garage being slightly changed. The Applicants have indicated they are agreeable to <br /> moving the garage back an additional five feet from the property line resulting in a 10-foot setback <br /> rather than six feet. There would be a five-foot setback to the alley, which is agreeable to Staff since <br /> the City does not intend to develop the alley as a traveled road. Currently the alley is used for electric <br /> service. <br /> The Applicant did state he has a hardship due to the location of a mature pine tree that is located behind <br /> the garage with approximately a 35-foot drip line. The Applicant is unable to move the garage any <br /> further back due to the location of this tree. <br /> The Applicants have also agreed to reduce the size of the outside parking area to approximately a <br /> 15-foot width in order to accommodate some off-street parking. <br /> Weinberger stated the second part of the application deals with the Applicant proposing to replace an <br /> existing fence that is six feet in height within the side yard adjacent to street setback where a maximum <br /> height fence is allowed to be 3.5 feet. The fence is intended to be a privacy fence to the back yard. <br /> The fence is currently located 27 feet from the property line. Weinberger noted the Planning <br /> Commission at its previous meeting did indicate general support for the fence height variance. The <br /> Applicants would like to increase the size of their back yard and relocate a portion of the fence in order <br /> to meet a 15-foot setback. <br /> Staff recommends approval of the variances to permit replacement of the fence within 50 feet of the <br /> street property line and replacement of the existing garage. <br /> Brown stated he has spoken with his neighbor regarding this project,who has indicated he is supportive <br /> of the project and is willing to help with the landscaping. Brown commented they are planning to plant <br /> some arborvitae in the yard and to reduce the size of the outdoor parking area as much as possible. <br /> Stoddard inquired whether any cars parked in the driveway would stick out into the street with the <br /> proposed new location of the garage. <br /> Brown stated the garage is proposed to be located 22 feet from the road. Brown stated in his view the <br /> change in the location of the fence will improve the look of the property. Brown indicated he is <br /> planning to erect a decorative fence rather than the current stockade fence. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Smith inquired why the Applicant would like a six-foot fence versus a 3.5-foot fence. <br /> PAGE 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.