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 /> (#02-2801 KATHY MELIN, Continued) <br /> Mabusth pointed out that the other decks are merely slabs. <br /> Bremer asked how big the house was. <br /> Weinberger stated that the residence is 1,242 s.f., not including the shed and garage. <br /> Smith inquired if the tuck under garage was included in the calculations. <br /> Weinberger noted that he merely acknowledged the door, since it is virtually under the hill. <br /> There were no public comments. <br /> Hawn stated that while the Commission's job is to give direction, she recommended the <br /> applicant come up with a design that keeps to the 1,500 s.f. structural coverage and 75' setback. <br /> She stated that the applicant has a very tough road ahead and needs to look closely at the codes <br /> and work with staff on the proposal. She asked if the Commission should table the application. <br /> Melin asked if she were willing to remove everything in order to meet the 1,500 s.f, could she <br /> have her porch. <br /> Berg suggested the applicant talk further with staff and come back with a new plan. <br /> Bremer inquired if wrapping the deck would be workable. <br /> Mabusth indicated that by doing so they would be encroaching further into the 75' setback, and <br /> suggested going to the east side in order to pull the addition out of the average lakeshore setback. <br /> Melin stated that neither of her neighbors had complained about the addition protruding further <br /> than their residences. <br /> Smith maintained that the average lakeshore setback ensures that individuals don't encroach on <br /> each others views. <br /> Weinberger pointed out that, typically, when an applicant is well over the amount of hardcover <br /> allowed the Commission looks for ways to remove excess hardcover. He questioned whether the <br /> old garage's existing driveway could be removed, however, maintained that this could not be <br /> done without restricting access to the home. <br /> Smith asked the applicant if a motion should be made to table the request. <br /> PAGE 17 of 36 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.