My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-19-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2007
>
03-19-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2012 4:41:09 PM
Creation date
6/19/2012 4:40:41 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.
/
529
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
� r <br /> MINUTES OF THE <br /> � ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,November 20,2006 <br /> � 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#06-3246 HTGHMARK BUILDERS,INC., CONTINUED) <br /> stated she did speak with the applicant this afternoon and he has indicated he has started to adclress some <br /> of tl�e issues raised by SY1ff. <br /> Bremer stated it is difficult for the Plani�ing Commission to hear an applicatio�i when ifi is not complete <br /> and that in her view it really is not appropriate for the Planning Comm ission to hear incomplete ' <br /> applications. <br /> Bremer noted a resident did hand the Planning Commissioners some information prior to the application <br /> being heard. <br /> Morris stated the neighboi's concern regarding the height is the reason for the application not being <br /> complete. <br /> Turner stated what made the application incomplete was that it was submitted as a conlplete application <br /> aud technically the plans do not comply with the City's regulations since the code change was not <br /> approved. <br /> Morris stated they did not have time to submit a revised plan. Morris stated they are requesting the <br /> variance because of the eaisting sewer line that intersects approximately 210 feet from tl�e setback to the <br /> lakeshore,which is causing tlie proposed home to be located closer to the lake. Morris stated tlley are <br />_ attempting to design a home with a number of amenities but they are restricted in the size of the structure <br /> due to the easements. Morris provided Staff with some revised hardcover numbers. <br /> Morris noted the structural coverage is well below the allowable li�nit. <br /> Ralin stated it does not appear that the proposed home is going to fit oii this lot and tl�at he is not in favor <br /> of a variauce to the average lakeshore setback even tl�ougl�this is a hardship lot. Rahn stated in his <br /> opinion tlie house can be redesigned to fit better on the lot. <br /> Morris stated the garage has been reduced by a foot and a half to allow tlle I�ouse to slide furtl�er back on <br /> the lot. Morris indicated tlley are not locating the house any closer to the lake and that they are using the <br /> deck as the farthest part of the new home. Morris stated the adjacent lot to the west is 958 feet and this lot <br /> is 951 feet. <br /> Turner stated the eaisting house o�l the west end is one story and the deck is actually below the level of <br /> the neighbor's house. Turuer stated the eaisting l�ouse does already encroach into the average lakeshore <br /> setback but that the neighbor's view is not impacted because tlie neighbor's house is approaimately one . <br /> story higher than this house. <br /> Bremer stated sl�e understands the hardship created by the easement. Bremer inquired I�ow big the <br /> Uuildable area is. � <br /> PAGE 19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.