My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/20/03 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
10/20/03 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2012 4:03:39 PM
Creation date
2/27/2012 4:03:39 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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, October 20, 2003 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#5) #02-2858 SCOTT STANDA, 2659 CASCO POINT ROAD, Continued <br /> Mabusth questioned whether the LMCD would have an issue with the structure protruding <br /> over the water. <br /> Gaffron stated that the LMCD may want to look at it if the posts are at or below the <br /> OHWL. <br /> If this application had come before the Commission before the fact, Mabusth asked the <br /> Commission what they would have allowed. She noted that she would have asked for the <br /> removal of the slab. <br /> Hawn questioned whether they would have approved a deck on an accessory structure, and <br /> an even bigger deck than previously attached to this nonconforming structure. She asked <br /> whether it was the Commission's intent to do away with these structures altogether. Hawn <br /> asked what record the City has of the previous deck size. <br /> While he felt that he probably would not have allowed it, Rahn stated that it was not out of <br /> character of what is currently in the neighborhood. <br /> Mr. Standa stated that the deck has always been on the structure. <br /> Gaffron agreed that, to everyone's knowledge, the deck had always been there. He noted <br /> that research could be done to find the original paperwork. <br /> Rahn maintained that the cantilevered portion was new, and asked the applicant consider a <br /> straight replacement, without the cantilever, and minimum landing. <br /> Mr. Standa stated that he would like a deck to allow for safe exit from the sliding doors <br /> that have always been there as well. <br /> There was no public comment. <br /> Fritzler suggested the applicant remove the sliding doors and replace them with a solid <br /> window. <br /> Mabusth stated that she believed the applicant should be allowed some kind of access <br /> platform out of the doors, for safety sake, adding that a second exit is beneficial. <br /> Rahn noted that two accesses are not mandatory. <br /> In light of the removals, Mabusth stated that she felt a 4' platform was a fair compromise. <br /> Page 5 of 29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.