My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-16-2006 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2006
>
10-16-2006 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2012 3:30:23 PM
Creation date
6/13/2012 11:38:09 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.
/
1749
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
NIINUTES OF THE . <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION ' <br /> Monday,Septen�ber 18,2006 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#06-3232 Micl��el and Mary Drazan,Continued) <br /> • Rahn stated it is difficult to conunent on an application when fihere have Ueen changes made to a plan and <br /> - the plan does not reflect those changes.� <br /> Michael Drazan stated the original plan contained the retaining wall,which was not their intent, and that <br /> they suUmitted the revised plan to show the eliminatioi�of the retainin�wall. � . <br /> Rahn uoted the Planning Comnlissioii is also lacking the comments of the Ciiy Engineer. <br /> Kroeger inquired whether the retaining walls consist of the 13.9 percent hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone. <br /> Michael.Drazan indicated that consists of the deck and the retaining wall. <br /> Curtis noted a portion of the residence is also within the 0-75 foot zone. <br /> Jurgens iriquired whether the lakeside deck would be removed. <br /> MichaeL Drazan indicated the deck is embedded in the stairs and that they were not planning on removing . <br /> the deck. � <br /> Jurgens stated the rock walkway,the timber planters,and other nonessential hardcover should be <br /> removed. - <br /> Mary Drazan stated they have iiot addressed the 0-75 foot setback zone at this time due to a couple of <br /> issues. Drazan noted they have lost approximately two feet of lakeshore and that they are planning to put <br /> Uetter rip-rap in that area to prevent further erosion. Drazan stated they did not include that in their plans <br /> because they were not informed on the City's position regarding that aspect and that they would prefer to <br /> address that in the future. � <br /> Breuier stated the Planning Commission likes to look at properties as a whole and that all nonessential <br /> hardcover within the 0-75 foot setUack would be required to Ue removed. Bremer reconunended the <br /> applicant look at the 0-75 foot setback zone io determine wliat is essential hardcover. <br /> Michael Drazan stated the deck attaches to a retainiiig wall underneatll and that the timbers have started to <br /> rot and need to Ue replaced. <br /> Ralui stated the City�ugineer could determine whether the retaining walls within tlie 0-75 foot zone are <br /> necessaty for erosioii control. � <br /> Jurgens stated the 0-75 foot zone should be addressed at this fiime rather than at some pouit in ihe future. <br /> Curtis noted she did advise the applicants to wait on the work in tlie 0-75 foot setUack and lhat it is the <br /> intent of the applicauts to conie Uack sometime in the spring with a proposaL <br /> PAGE 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.