My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-27-2014 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2014
>
01-27-2014 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2015 4:44:55 PM
Creation date
4/6/2015 1:13:23 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.
/
369
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
� <br /> MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,October 21,2013 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Curtis noted there is one comment from a neighbor included in the packet. <br /> Leskinen asked how large of an addition could be constructed and still meet the setbacks. <br /> Curtis indicated no matter what the property owner does, he would encroach further into the average <br /> lakeshore setback, which would require a variance. Curtis noted tihere is a portion of the garage addition <br /> that would meet both of the other setbacks. Curtis stated the applicants did not have the 75-foot setback <br /> reflected on the survey and that she has outlined it as best she cauld. <br /> Thiesse asked if a garage located anywhere along the driveway would meet the 30-foot setback. <br /> Curtis stated it would not. <br /> Landgraver stated in his view the Planning Commission will not reach unanimous consent on the <br /> application and that there is no simple solution. Landgraver�stated he likes Commissioner Schoenzeit's <br /> suggestion that there could be a compromise but that 12 feet is not realistic. <br /> Curtis stated the only solution that would meet a11��setbacks and not require a variance would be to take up <br /> some of the interior room of the home. <br /> Schoenzeit noted the property is large enough t�replace the living space:somewhere else if the applicants <br /> would like. <br /> Curtis stated variances would be required. <br /> Leskinen stated she is not in favor nf the application as proposed but that she is not in a position to <br /> redesign it. <br /> Thiesse asked�if there is a number Chair Leskinen would be willing to extend the garage. <br /> Leskinen indieated ther`e'is�not.� � �� <br /> Lesnke stated he understands the�praciical difficulty and that he likes Commissioner Schoenzeit's <br /> suggestion of going six feet rather than 12 feet. <br /> Thiesse noted that��ould result in a 24-foot garage, which is a reasonable expectation for a new garage. <br /> Leskinen asked�whether the Planning Commission would like to table the application to allow the <br /> applicant the time to�revise��his plans. Leskinen stated it appears it would not be approved as proposed. <br /> Schoenzeit stated he would suggest the applicant bring back a more moderate proposal. <br /> Leskinen asked how the applicant feels about tabling the application. <br /> Lixiao Wang indicated that would be fine. Wang noted at an earlier time they had a three-car garage on <br /> the property but that there is now an elevator taking up approximately one-third of the space in the garage <br /> and that he cannot take out that element. <br /> Page 22 of 42 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.