My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-16-1991 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
09-16-1991 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2012 9:03:49 AM
Creation date
2/28/2012 9:03:48 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — SEPTEMBER 16, 1991 <br />ZONING FILE 01679 — CONT. <br />• Gaffron reported that the proposed garage leaves about a 3' <br />area of the existing gravel parking area behind the garage which <br />will not be able to be used as parking in the future. However, <br />it has been driven on before and it may be compacted and there- <br />fore has been classified as hardcover. <br />Rowlette asked what normal two —car garage dimensions are. <br />Gaffron noted that it is about 20'x24'. <br />Miller explained that the normal two —car garage is 22'x24', <br />and he is proposing a three car garage with a 20' depth. He felt <br />that it is necessary to have a three car garage for storage of <br />cars, boats, etc. He also stated that the cost factor would not <br />justify building a two —car garage. <br />Schroeder felt that the garage is too large. Moos also <br />concurred. <br />Miller felt that he has reduced the hardcover down as much <br />as possible. He also noted the other variances which were <br />approved with excesses of hardcover. <br />Schroeder responded that each application is different with <br />different merits. <br />Johnson felt there is a large amount of hardcover on the <br />• property and felt that the hardcover should be reduced. <br />Miller explained that if it is tabled or denied and the <br />garage is not built, then the hardcover stays at 37 %, opposed to <br />the 30% proposed. With respect to the bathhouse, Miller pointed <br />out that only the bottom half of the structure was replaced. <br />Johnson asked about the new slab. <br />Miller stressed that only the foundation for the posts on <br />the lake side were replaced. <br />Rowlette concurred that if the deck /stairway /bathhouse is <br />considered as one unit, then the value is probably far more than <br />what was repaired. She asked if the deck and stairs could stand <br />alone. <br />Gaffron advised that they could. <br />It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Moos, to recommend <br />approval of the structural maintenance of the bathhouse. Ayes 3, <br />nays 2. <br />Johnson voted nay because he felt it was basically replaced <br />and Schroeder concurred with that feeling. <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.