My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-20-2014 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2014
>
10-20-2014 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2018 12:25:24 PM
Creation date
4/6/2015 1:35:14 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.
/
470
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
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, September 15, 2014 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 33 of 59 <br /> <br /> <br />Gaffron stated to his knowledge it is not. Gaffron noted the City has 37 or 38 fire lanes throughout the <br />City and that the general expectation is that the fire lanes will be used primarily by the residents of the <br />neighborhood since the majority of them do not have parking available. Gaffron indicated the City <br />usually does not publish them because the neighbors do not want it to become a regional draw. <br /> <br />Berg noted this fire lane is used by the neighborhood and that there is a dock there. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the dock was taken out and put back this year at the request of the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Landgraver asked if the dock can be removed by the adjoining property owner. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the dock is within the right-of-way corridor and the neighbors cannot remove it. <br /> <br />Sven Gustafson, Stone Wood, pointed out the zoning district changes at the fire lane and that in his view <br />this property is in the wrong zone. Gustafson stated the zoning for this property requires a 140–foot <br />minimum width and this property has 99 feet. In addition, it requires a one-acre minimum and this <br />property consists of six-tenths of an acre. Gustafson stated to the other side of the fire lane the setback is <br />15 feet instead of 35 feet and that this is an awkward transition of a lot that missed the cut of where it <br />should have been. <br /> <br />Gustafson stated the property to the east of this one also has an encroaching structure that is 5.2 feet from <br />the property line as well as a paver walkway that overlaps the side yard setback. Gustafson indicated he <br />is attempting to make reasonable use of the property and will be centering the home between the <br />neighboring structures. Gustafson stated it will not be a large home and will be under the structural <br />coverage limits at approximately 13 percent. <br /> <br />Landgraver asked if he is okay with Staff’s recommendation regarding a landscaping plan. <br /> <br />Gustafson indicated he is. Gustafson noted the fire lane is not an area that is really viewable from inside <br />the house but that if there is a need to shield the fire lane, they would be open to that. Gustafson stated a <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 10/20/2014 <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 09/15/2014 <br />[Page 33 of 59]
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.