My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08/16/1993 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
08/16/1993 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2012 12:10:00 PM
Creation date
2/28/2012 12:10:00 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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 <br />9 HELD AUGUST 16, 1993 <br />ZONING FILE #1829 - CONT. <br />Mabusth explained sometime in 1991 existing decks were repaired and the 160 s.f. of deck <br />expansion was completed. <br />Gerald Sieff reiterated that within the 0 -75' zone, which seems to be of most concern, they <br />propose to reduce hardcover to 0% plus the rose beds and the concrete slabs which are over 3 <br />times the area. <br />Chair Schroeder asked if the driveway could be a viable reduction. <br />Gerald Sieff replied there is no way to change the driveway because the neighbor uses it. If <br />we take out the driveway, the neighbor won't get out unless she puts more hardcover in <br />between our two driveways at a lower place. He felt they are being victimized because the deck <br />was put up without his mother's consent or notice by her former husband. <br />Chair Schroeder explained it has nothing to do with personal relationships but is an attempt to <br />reduce hardcover at the margin. We think you have made a good start. The shed is an <br />important removal in the 0 -75' setback and the plastic is something the City supports. <br />Smith suggested if applicants feel strongly about having two driveways, perhaps there are some <br />opportunities to make tradeoffs in terms of the deck or portions of it instead of simply removing <br />plastic. <br />Chair Schroeder stated the excess is considerable in the 75 -250' setback area and we are trying <br />to suggest a few alternatives to remove more. <br />Gerald Sieff felt that the impression he is getting is they have a choice to either remove 160' of <br />deck or over 500' of other hardcover. <br />Mabusth clarified in cases where excesses in hardcover exist on a property, the improvements <br />would have required variance approval for structural repairs to existing decks not just for the <br />expanded deck area. A problem for applicant is that you credit all hardcover the same. Does <br />he want a letter from the neighbor claiming a hardship if they remove that section of driveway? <br />Smith offered suggestions to remove the planters altogether and have the deck stop at that point. <br />Mrs. Sieff asked if you are just talking about removing the timbers. <br />0 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.