My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/18/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
04/18/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2012 9:24:21 AM
Creation date
3/9/2012 9:24:19 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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,April 18,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> *3. 05-3086 PHILIP AND CASSANDRA ORDWAY, 1145 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH— <br /> VARIANCE—REVISED PLAN <br /> Rahn moved,Jurgens seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3086,Philip and <br /> Cassandra Ordway, 1145 Sixth Avenue North,granting of a top of bluff variance to allow <br /> construction of a new home,subject to the conditions outlined in Staff's Report dated <br /> April 14,2005. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. <br /> 4. #05-3089 THEODORE AND DEBORAH ROZEBOOM,2967 CASCO POINT ROAD— <br /> VARIANCE, 6:04 p.m.—6:13 p.m. <br /> Theodore Rozeboom,Applicant, was present. <br /> Gundlach stated the applicant has revised his application and is now proposing to relocate the hot tub to <br /> the roof of the proposed porch, an addition connecting the house and detached garage, and removal of <br /> hardcover within the 75-250 zone,which will bring that zone into conformance. A hardcover variance for <br /> the 250'-500' zone is required as well as an average lakeshore setback variance. <br /> Gundlach indicated the applicants have removed the existing porch and have discovered that the existing <br /> walls and roof need to be completely rebuilt in order to accommodate the hot tub. In addition,the <br /> applicants are required to have a foundation under the existing detached garage in order to connect the <br /> house and garage, and if a foundation is not in existence, the garage would need to be torn down and <br /> rebuilt with a foundation in a conforming location. <br /> Staff recommends approval based on the stipulations outlined in Staff's Report. <br /> Rozeboom stated the porch has been removed but no other work has been completed on the front half of <br /> the building. <br /> Rahn commented based on his review of the site,the existing garage is not on frost-protected footings. <br /> Rozeboom stated they would like to now keep the garage separated instead of the proposed addition,but <br /> would like some type of overhang on the backside of the house. <br /> Gundlach stated a ten-foot separation is required between buildings and a variance would be needed. <br /> Rahn indicated the Planning Commission can only act on the plan that is before them tonight. Rahn <br /> inquired whether the applicant would like to table his application. <br /> Rozeboom stated he would appear before the Planning Commission at the time he decides to go forward <br /> with the work on the garage but would like approval on the rest of his application. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the location of the overhead garage door would be relocated. <br /> PAGE 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.