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
Curtis stated the dotted line illustrates the easement and pointed out the driveway is paved with a little <br /> jog, which does enter the easement slightly. <br /> Landgraver asked if the applicant could come back and request full use of the easement. <br /> Curtis indicated that is correct. <br /> Landgraver asked if that is being requested at the present time. <br /> Curtis stated it is not. <br /> Wang stated he does not plan on coming back for that. ' <br /> Thiesse noted the City does not have any regulations preventing people from parking in their driveway. <br /> Lemke asked if the existing house is over the 75-foot setbaek. <br /> Curtis indicated it is slightly and that the garage addition would be a slight-extension of the encroachment. <br /> Curtis stated due to the topography,the garage addition would be a slightly bigger encroachment than the <br /> house. <br /> Landgraver asked what kind of feedback the City Council had on this appiication. <br /> Curtis stated there was a discussion about the need for a reasonable ��arage space but that the City Council <br /> did not feel the deck was necessary. Curtis stated to hei-understanding there was not unanimous support <br /> for the addition and that the City Council instead wanted the Pla�ning Commission to relook at the <br /> application. � <br /> Thiesse asked if he proposed a 9-�foot addition at the City Council meeting. <br /> Curtis stated the applicant brought forward a 6-foot addition to the City Council and that a 9-foot addition <br /> was brought fo��vard to:the Planning Commission the second time. <br /> Thissse stated he is conflicted�on this application given the fact that the design of a vehicle that the <br /> transportation agencies use is 19 feet long, which is a practical difficulty in his mind. Thiesse stated an <br /> additional si��feet would make it a 24-foot garage,which is a fairly standard garage, and that in his view <br /> an 18-foot garage should never have been built. Thiesse stated he does not care if he can park a car in the <br /> third stall, but�the fact that thebac�C�v�all contains mechanical equipment constitutes a practical difficulty. <br /> Lemke asked if�tl�e mechanical equipment is along the entire wall. <br /> Thiesse stated he does�n�t know,but that even if it is half of the wall,that would only leave a one-stall <br /> garage. <br /> Thiesse asked Delaney if the garage would really affect her view of the lake given the trees in the area. <br /> Delaney stated when the leaves are down, it would, but in the summer the leaves block it. <br /> Thiesse stated if the 6-foot addition is not allowed,the cars will be sitting out in the driveway and <br /> blocking the neighbor's view to some degree. Thiesse stated he does see a practical difficulty. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.