My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-16-2002 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2002
>
09-16-2002 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2012 3:07:45 PM
Creation date
2/27/2012 3:07:44 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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, September 16, 2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#5) #02-2822 DANIELLE HENELY,3422 LIVINGSTON AVENUE, Continued <br /> Henely asked if she could drop the deck and cut off the corner. <br /> If the lot were not a"through" lot, Hawn asked what the setback would be from the County <br /> Road. <br /> Gaffron stated that, typically, the required setback would be 10', however, due to the County <br /> Road, a 30' setback is required. <br /> Rahn indicated that it would be difficult to allow a deck at all on the north side due to the setback <br /> requirements. <br /> If the deck were lowered, eliminated from the structural coverage equation, and reduced to meet <br /> a 10' setback, Chair Smith asked if the Commission could allow the applicant a 20'X22' garage. <br /> Fritzler suggested lowering the deck by two feet and cutting the diagonal corner of the deck. <br /> Since the home never possessed a garage, Chair Smith inquired what moved the applicant to <br /> request a detached garage at this time. <br /> Henely indicated that she had gone to great lengths to diminish the hardcover previously on the <br /> property, including removal of concrete sidewalks,pads, and edging. Although the home did not <br /> possess a garage at the time of purchase, it was all that she could afford and the applicant felt she <br /> would construct one later. Having faced car trouble last winter, Ms. Henely decided that a garage <br /> would be desirable sooner. <br /> Mabusth asked if the corner of the deck could be shaved closer to the home in order to acquire a <br /> 15' setback. <br /> Gaffron felt this to be a reasonable request, since the home to the northwest was 15' from County <br /> Road 19. He suggested the applicant measure 15' from the County Road and angle the corner <br /> off, which would allow a 6' walkway around the corner of the house. <br /> Chair Smith recapped, stating that the Commission would recommend the applicant drop the <br /> deck, stay 15' away from the County Road lot line, and create a diagonal deck walkway in order <br /> to fall within the proposed 1500' structural coverage limitation. <br /> Chair Smith stated that, in her opinion, the detached garage proposal which blocks the house was <br /> not the most aesthetically pleasing concept, she could support the application, acknowledging <br /> that it is the applicant who has to live with the design. <br /> PAGE 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.