My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/17/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
10/17/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2012 9:38:06 AM
Creation date
3/9/2012 9:38:04 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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 17,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3146 Mark and Pamela Palm,Continued) <br /> Brennan stated if the garage structure were located closer to the street,the actual dimensions would <br /> increase,which would allow the garage to remain at what was originally approved. Brennan indicated as <br /> the garage is moved closer to the street, it would increase the dimensions. <br /> Rahn stated it appears this application may need to be tabled for a redesign. <br /> Bremer inquired what size structure the applicant would like. <br /> Brennan stated he is not familiar with what happened in previous meetings since he only became involved <br /> in this application today. Brennan stated the applicant would like a functional garage. Brennan stated if <br /> the hardcover and side yard setback encroachments were required to be reduced,they would like a <br /> structure that is appropriate for this lot. <br /> Bremer suggested Brennan work with the applicant and table the application. <br /> Brennan stated they would like some feedback from the Planning Commission. <br /> Leslie noted 34 by 22 was approved previously,which equates to 748 feet and satisfies the setback <br /> requirement. <br /> Brennan indicated that size requires a setback of 10 feet. <br /> Bremer stated due to the topography, a front-loading garage was previously determined not to be <br /> appropriate for this lot and that was why it was allowed with that short of setback. Bremer questioned <br /> whether the Planning Commission would be okay with approving what was previously approved. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the structure would look like what is depicted in the plans. <br /> Brennan stated he would recommend the structure face the street. Brennan indicated it would still have <br /> the appearance of a single-story structure. <br /> Kempf noted the applicant's driveway is extremely steep and that in his view it could be a very dangerous <br /> situation in the winter. Kempf stated when he stood on the slope and was at the height of the street,his <br /> line of sight was at the roof of the current garage. Kempf suggested the applicant consider a lower level <br /> garage that loaded from the side of the house. Kempf stated a garage that you could drive directly from <br /> the street would make it a safer driveway and would allow for storage underneath the garage. <br /> Brennan stated the one disadvantage would be that you would have to exit from a stairway into the house. <br /> Kempf suggested the garage be made wide enough to construct a staircase inside the garage. <br /> Palm stated the previous neighbor had a similar situation and that the walk from the garage to the house <br /> was quite a distance. <br /> PAGE 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.