My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-15-2002 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2002
>
07-15-2002 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2012 2:35:07 PM
Creation date
2/27/2012 2:35:07 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,July 15,2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#02-2803 JEFF MARTINEAU ON BEHALF OF CHERRY STUBBS, Continued) <br /> construction. Gaffron recommended that the outbuildings on lot 1 be removed at the time the <br /> subdivision is approved because that lot then becomes a lot without a principal structure, and <br /> shouldn't have any accessory structures. The accessory buildings on outlot A should also be <br /> removed at that point, and a small shed on lot 2 should be considered for removal. The existing <br /> house, garage, and large shed in the northwest quadrant of the property could remain for the time <br /> being and have no impact on the next lot. <br /> Smith asked if this would be agreeable to the applicant. <br /> Gronberg stated that he had been given the impression that some negotiation is going on with <br /> buyers or a single buyer, who would live in the existing house until the new residence would be <br /> built. Gronberg felt the existing house would not be a permanent structure, but should be <br /> allowed to remain while they are building. <br /> Berg stated that the Commission would like the other accessory structures to be removed with the <br /> subdivision. <br /> Mabusth asked if there was an engineer's report to review. <br /> Weinberger stated that there was not one available yet. <br /> Smith inquired whether this should hold up the process. <br /> Weinberger stated that it should not hold up the process, but should certainly be available to <br /> Council. <br /> Smith reiterated that the direction the Commission is taking is for removal of the smaller sheds <br /> and accessory structures, while leaving the existing house, garage, and large shed for now. <br /> Fritzler asked if the development does separate the two pieces, does the existing driveway for lot <br /> 2 turn over to outlot. <br /> Smith stated that if the existing house is still being used at this point, access will get fairly <br /> difficult. <br /> Gronberg stated that the residents would use the existing driveway to access the existing house. <br /> Mabusth maintained that they need to set a deadline for when it has to be removed. <br /> PAGE 14 of 36 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.