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 /> (#01-2730 Ace Properties,Continued) <br /> Lindquist commented in his view this should be considered as a tear-down and a rebuild, and <br /> recommended the structural coverage be limited at 15 percent. <br /> Mabusth noted there are concerns regarding drainage in this area. Mabusth inquired whether there are <br /> any other drainage problems that the City is aware of in this area. <br /> Weinberger stated a concern has arisen regarding drainage in this area due to the amount of new <br /> construction that is occurring and the amount of hardcover that exists. <br /> Palm stated the lot does have open space on either side of the house. <br /> Weinberger stated Staff would review the drainage once a final site plan has been arrived at. <br /> Stoddard stated he does not have a problem with most of the variances being requested, but in his view <br /> there should be a side yard setback of 10 feet. Stoddard recommended the structural coverage also be <br /> reduced. Stoddard suggested the Applicant also take into account the average lakeshore setback when <br /> redesigning his plan. <br /> Palm stated the average setback would be determined from the existing concrete foundation. <br /> Rahn indicated he has a concern regarding the view of the neighbors if this size structure is constructed. <br /> Palm stated the proposed residence is the same height as the neighbor to the west. Palm stated they are <br /> trying to accommodate the City, noting it is less cost effective if they are required to redesign their <br /> plan. <br /> Hawn stated the Planning Commission typically does not grant variances to structural coverage on new <br /> construction. Hawn stated in her view the only hardship is the small size of the lot,which doesn't drive <br /> the granting of this number of variances according to State Statute. Hawn stated hardships typically <br /> run with the topography of the land. <br /> Hawn commented it appears to be the consensus of the Planning Commission that the plan before them <br /> tonight is not something they are willing to support. Hawn stated the Applicant has the option of <br /> having the Planning Commission vote on this application tonight or to table it. <br /> Palm requested the Planning Commission give some direction on what type of house they would like to <br /> see for this lot. <br /> Hawn recommended the structural coverage be limited to 15 percent. <br /> It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that structural coverage should be limited to 1,500 <br /> square feet and that variances to lot width and lot area are appropriate. <br /> Hawn noted the proposed side yard setbacks are also an issue that will need to be addressed. Hawn <br /> inquired whether the Applicant would like this application tabled in order to give him time to revise his <br /> plans. <br /> PAGE 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.