My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-16-2016 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2016
>
05-16-2016 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 2:55:41 PM
Creation date
8/24/2016 2:55:39 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 16,2016 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Landgraver questioned whether that is a factor to be taken into account here. <br /> Eric Zehnder stated he understands everything is based on existing grade but noted that the grade at the <br /> deck will change by a couple of feet since there is a negative grade towards the house. Zehnder noted the <br /> elevations are not accurate per grade on the plans. <br /> Gaffron indicated there will be some fill to facilitate drainage. <br /> Schoenzeit noted hardcover is under the allowable amount. <br /> Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. <br /> Schwingler commented it is an odd location for a house on a dead-end road and that the house really is <br /> not visible. <br /> Thiesse stated the back lot line elevation is at 974' and the garage was at 966' and that the neighboring <br /> property cannot see the deck. Thiesse stated a person cannot see the deck from anywhere. If the deck is <br /> lowered three steps, it would be compliant but would be harder to use. Thiesse stated he is not sure why <br /> the City should make someone make a deck more difficult to use. <br /> Leskinen stated there may have been more structural coverage on the lot previously than what is being <br /> proposed. <br /> Schwingler commented there is also plenty of privacy in the neighborhood. <br /> Leskinen asked if it rises to the level of a practical difficulty to grant a variance. <br /> Thiesse stated going up and down three steps in his view would constitute a hardship but not necessarily a <br /> practical difficulty. <br /> Schoenzeit stated if the deck were lowered three steps,the hardcover and structural coverage numbers <br /> would be met but it makes it more difficult to use. <br /> Landgraver noted this is a clean slate development and the Planning Commission has always been preriy <br /> strict on the 15 percent structural coverage limit. Landgraver stated he is not sure the Planning <br /> Commission should just be focusing on the deck as it relates to the structural coverage. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the grading could be changed to make the deck a patio. <br /> Landgraver stated other applicants have come before the Planning Commission and they have been held <br /> to the 15 percent structural coverage limit. <br /> Thiesse noted if the house were reduced, it would likely require a complete redesign of the house. <br /> Page 12 of 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.