My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/17/2006 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
01/17/2006 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/15/2012 3:31:50 PM
Creation date
5/15/2012 3:31:47 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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 /> Tuesday,January 17,2006 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (MARK AND PAMELA PALM,CONTINUED) <br /> garage further into the current driveway. Palm stated in his opinion that would make it dif�cult to back <br /> out and he would prefer to leave the wall where it currently is. <br /> Palm noted at the time he first applied for the variance,he was approved for a 5-foot setback. Palm <br /> inquired why he is now being required to comply with a 10-foot setback. <br /> Gaffron stated the rules have not changed but that the size of the garage dictates the setback requirements. <br /> Palm stated he is fine with leaving the garage where it currently sits,meeting the 5-foot setback with the <br /> garage being 750 square feet. <br /> Gaffron stated a 10-foot setback is required for any new construction. <br /> Palm stated he was granted a variance the last time for a 5-foot setback. Palm stated the application was <br /> granted back in 2002 with the provision that the garage be located five feet from the property line. <br /> Gaffron stated Council did grant a 5-foot variance in 2002 but that Staff is questioning today whether or <br /> not there is still a sufficient hardship to support that setback. <br /> Bremer noted 22' by 34' were the approved dimensions and the applicant is now requesting a 25' by 32' <br /> garage. Bremer stated the Planning Commission tends to allow smaller structures to be located closer to <br /> the property line. <br /> Palm stated he was directed to move it out of the 75'-250' zone and move it closer to the road. Palm <br /> stated if he did that,he would not be able to back out of the garage as well. <br /> Winkey inquired whether the applicant could move the garage if the wall were removed. <br /> Palm stated he would also need to remove some trees. <br /> Leslie inquired when the county installed the curbing. <br /> Palm stated the curbing was installed this fall. <br /> Leslie inquired why the variance expired without the garage being built. <br /> Palm stated he did not construct the garage originally due to the drainage issues and financial reasons. <br /> Bremer stated she personally would let the applicant construct what was originally approved,but doubted <br /> whether a Suburban would fit into the garage. <br /> PAGE 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.