My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-20-2006 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2006
>
11-20-2006 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2012 2:46:52 PM
Creation date
6/13/2012 2:25:36 PM
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.
/
451
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
�m�rr�T�cs or Tx�c <br /> ORONO PLANNING COM112ISSION � <br /> MO11CI1y,Angust 21,2006 <br /> . 6:00 o'clock p.m. � � <br /> (#06-3225 875'WB'4�V,LLC, Confinuecl) <br /> Kempf inquired whether the only windows would be the higlzer transienf windorvs. , <br /> Carlson indicated that is fiheir intention. <br /> Jurgens stated there are issues witli the I'ire Code that would llave fio be addressed. <br /> ICeinpf indicated he is in agreement t11at ihe wetlands Ue included in ihe outlot. <br /> Kenlpf conunented tllat the izeighbor Uuffer would be taken away with the zero lot line and that he does <br /> not see the advantage to it. <br /> Carlson stated the advantage relates to tlze interior layout of the tuzits and that there would be essentially a . <br /> wall tliere with the transient windows located,up lzigher, <br /> Gaffron stated a fihree-foot separation may be necessary to have iransient��vindows. <br /> � Ralm stated there are issues with a zero foot lot line and suggested the applicants consider at least tluee <br /> feet between the units. <br /> Johnston sfated the Uuilding code is the biggest issue with the zero lot line. <br /> Kroeger inquired whetller there would be an egress issue with ihe zero lot line. � <br /> � Carlson stated the Uedrooms would be located on the other side of�11e unit and tlzat egress nlay be an issue <br /> if someone would like to put a Uedroonl in that area. <br /> Gaffron poiiited out Unit 8 is right up a�ainst a steep slope and that he has a concern there is not going to • <br /> be aiuple screening from the Luce Line. . . <br /> Keinpf indicated he did walk t11e Luce Line this a£teinoon aild that there are a nuinber of houses that are <br /> very close to the Luce Line that do not have niuch screening. Kempf si:ated tllere are also power lines that <br /> rui�Uetween tliis pro�erty and the Luce Line and 1:IZat it appears fihe view from the L;uce Line is not a <br /> si�nificant issue given the elevated power lines and the lower rooflines. <br /> ' Jurgens inquired whether ihe Planning Commission would�refer a vegetated slope versus a retaining <br /> wall. � <br /> ICxoeger conunenied ihai walls teiid to be more dangerous. <br /> Ralul inquired�vhether the slol�e ai its steepest is a l:l slo�e. � <br /> Gaffron stated ihere is a 1:1 slo�e for ap�roximately 15 feet. - <br /> • PAGE 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.