My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-15-1991 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
07-15-1991 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2012 9:02:15 AM
Creation date
2/28/2012 9:02:15 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 15, 1991 <br />( #10)ZONING FILE $1665 - MCCARTHY CONTINUED <br />Mularoni stated that he could have opted to remove the <br />existing garage to construct an attached two -car garage. <br />However, that would still have required a front yard setback <br />Variance, and would have had more of an impact on the existing <br />tree. He said, "The plan we are now proposing will only encroach <br />on approximately 20% of the root zone of the tree." <br />Rowlette said, "If the applicant constructs a standard <br />two -car garage, then the front of the garage would extend <br />straight across. The way it is now proposed, the garage addition <br />will be set back farther from the street to allow for parking. <br />If parking in front of the garage is eliminated, then there will <br />have to be a parking area off to the side. Perhaps the standard <br />two -car garage would be worse than what is being proposed." <br />Mularoni added, "My client objected to having a flat expanse <br />of garage door as the focal point of the entrance. I tried to <br />design something that would be a bit more pleasing to the eye, <br />while providing the most direct access to the house, and keeping <br />hardcover to a minimum." <br />Kelley raised the issue of fire protection as another <br />concern. He stated that there would be no room for a fire truck <br />to get back to the house if the proposed garage structure is <br />constructed across the front of the property. The front of the <br />proposed garage will be 31 feet wide, and the width.of the lot is <br />only 50 feet. <br />Mularoni advised that there is a well on the property that <br />• <br />could be used in the case of fire. He showed that the well is <br />located just beyond the roof overhang. <br />Gaffron informed Mularoni that State law requires a minimum <br />of three feet from structure, which in this case would be the <br />overhang.. <br />- -- Mularoni stated that the well is three feet from the <br />overhang. <br />Bellows asked how the well would be maintained, given its <br />location, if the proposed garage is constructed. <br />Mularoni stated that another well could be dug if the <br />existing well required repair. <br />Kelley indicated that the issue of the well is entirely <br />separate. <br />Johnson reiterated that he is concerned about the <br />intensification of this property and-the overall visual effect it <br />will have on the neighborhood. He said, "I would recommend <br />- 12 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.