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
1vnNUT�cs or Tr� � <br /> . ORONO PLANNING CONiIYXZSSYON ' <br /> AZond�y,August 21,2006 � <br /> 6:00 o'clocic p.m. <br /> (#06-3225 875 BWB,LI,C, Continued) <br /> Jurgens coirullented ihere is not much vegetation along tl�e Luce Line presently and that the l�ower line <br /> easement may limit a person's ability to put vegetat7on in that area. <br /> 7olznsfion stated the easement is located entirely within ihe right-of-way of the Luce Line. <br /> Bremer commented in her view ilie property owners would prefer the screening. <br /> Jurgens stated he would prefer a slope witli vegetation rather than a wall. <br /> Brenler inquired whetlier the Plaiuzing Commission is agreeable to a maxinium of 30 feet Uuilding height. <br /> . Carlsoil stated the building height��vould be 28 feei;. <br /> 7urgens stated it was his widerstanding there would Ue a reshiction on the peak heigllt in ihe <br /> cornprehensive plan ainendmeut. � <br /> Gaffi•on stated the Council elected not to include that restriction in the comprel�ensive plaii ainendinent <br /> and tliat they would like that item to Ue discussed in conjunction witli the approval process. . <br /> Jurgens stated he would like the roof�itch not to eYCeed 12/12. <br /> Gafnon concurred tliat the pitch peak should be niscussed in caiij unclion wilh the appr�val pr�cess. <br /> Bremer inquired whether the Plaruiing Conimission is olcay with a depth of at least 20 feet. _ . <br /> Gaffron stated ihat is not an issue since all the unifs meet that requirement. <br /> Bremer inquired whether tliere would Ue any accessory sh�uctures. ' <br /> � C�lson indicated the.re would not Ue. , <br /> Bremer conunented ihe liii:le Uunzp-ouis along the road�vay work nice in Stonebay and suggested tlie <br /> applicant consider adding il�ose iu 11�is develo�meiit. <br /> 7ohnstoiz siated they would loolc at that. 7oluisi:on noted the iniddle o£the development consists of a rain <br /> garden. <br /> Gaffron innuired wlzether fihere would Ue two-way iraffic in the circle. <br /> Jolulston stated there could Ue iwo-way i1•afiic. . <br /> Jurgens suggested tliat perhaps the roadway in that area be increased to 24 feet, <br /> IPAGE 21 � <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.