My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-15-2006 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
05-15-2006 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2012 10:38:24 AM
Creation date
6/13/2012 10:38:03 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
373
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
FILE#06-3183 <br /> 10 May 2006 <br /> Page 5 of 5 <br /> ' compatible iii relation to the suitability of public waters to safely acconunodate <br /> these watercraft;Not applicable. <br /> Issues for Consideration � <br /> � l. The home as proposed has a walk-out level and a sub-basement below the walk-out <br /> level. While the home meets the 30' height limitation, we have reviewed the plans <br /> with respect to the number of stories and it appears that the proposed retaining walls <br /> and the sub-baseinent axe an attempt to aclueve the third story. Wliat is tlie Planning <br /> Conmzission's interpretatioii of the City's building heigllt definition (listed above) <br /> and the defmition of"story above grade"with respect to this plan? <br /> 2. What are the inipacts of the retaining wa11s when viewed from the adjacent property? <br /> Should an extensive screeuing plan be incorporated? <br /> 3. The plans for the 0-75' zone will need to be revised in order for Tom Kellogg to do a <br /> complete review. Prior to that happening, does the Planning Commission feel that <br /> there are changes that should be incorporated? <br /> . 4. As the vegetation ruat�ires will the walls be screeiied from views year round? <br /> 5. Are tliere any other issues or concerns with tlus application? ' <br /> Hardship Statement <br /> Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exlubifi B, and <br /> should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. <br /> Hardship Analysis <br /> , L: considering applicatlons for varinnce, the Plaitning Co�nn:issiar shall conslder the effect of t/ie <br /> proposed varimice upon t/ee Itealt/r,safety and welfare of tlie community, e�isting anrl anticip�rted traffic <br /> conditions, Iig1�t and air, tlanger of fire, risk to tlte public safet��, a�trl t/�e effect on values of property in <br /> t/ee surroun�ling area. The Planning Conrn:issio�t sliall co�:sicler recommending approval for variances <br /> from tlie literal provisions of tlee Zo�:ing Code in inslances w/iere tlieir strict exforce�nent would car�se <br /> undue harrlsliip becarrse of circusnstunces �uiique io t/ee inrlivirlual property �rnrler consideration, m:tl <br /> slrall reconrnzend approval o�tly wlre�l it is rlen2oirstrated that suclt uctions will be irt keeping wiilt il�e <br /> spirit anrl i�:tent of iJ�e Orono Zonin�Code. <br /> 3� . , ,'...+. <br /> Staff Recommendation <br /> Pla�uiing Sta.ff recominends approval of the lot width and lot area variances. The <br /> applicant must submit a revised, detailed landscape and construction plan for the work <br /> proposed in the 0-75' zone. However, due to the unresolved issues detailed in the "Issues <br /> for Consideratioii" staff reconunends that the application be tabled. � <br /> �. <br /> 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.