My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-21-2014 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2014
>
01-21-2014 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2018 10:47:09 AM
Creation date
4/6/2015 2:28:44 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.
/
233
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, November 18, 2013 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 28 of 35 <br /> <br />Landgraver stated in his view the applicant is responsible but that the Planning Commission is not certain <br />what the Watershed District will require for the buffer. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated the Watershed District’s trigger for administering their buffer ordinance is if the property <br />owner is redeveloping an existing site and it results in more hardcover than is currently on the property. <br />If that is the case, the Watershed District will implement their 25-foot buffer. Curtis indicated she is not <br />sure how the Watershed District would deal with an encroachment and mitigate that. <br /> <br />Landgraver stated that is a risk factor for the applicant but that the Planning Commission needs to act on <br />what is before them. <br /> <br />Leskinen stated she would be comfortable with Commissioner Thiesse’s suggestion of the building <br />footprint versus the building envelope. <br /> <br />McGrann asked whether the City Council would also only be approving the pad. <br /> <br />Curtis stated if that is what the Planning Commission recommends approval on, then that is what the City <br />Council would review. Curtis stated the Planning Commission would be approving the variances and <br />giving the applicant the go ahead to design the house within that building pad and other City <br />requirements. <br />Thiesse moved, Landgraver seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 13-3643, John <br />Brunello, 825 Willow Drive South, granting of lot area, side setback, and wetland setback <br />variances, and to approve the actual footprint of the house and not the building pad, subject to <br />Staff recommendations, with the second story meeting the 10-foot side yard setback and subject to <br />the requirements of the Watershed District. <br /> <br />Leskinen asked whether the Planning Commission should strike the portion of Staff’s recommendations <br />that require the footprint be up to the 50-foot front yard setback. <br /> <br />Thiesse indicated he is fine with striking that and that he does not care one way or the other. <br /> <br />Thiesse amended his motion, Landgraver seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 13- <br />3643, John Brunello, 825 Willow Drive South, granting of lot area, side setback, and wetland <br />setback variances, and to approve the actual footprint of the house and not the building pad, <br />subject to Staff recommendations, with the second story meeting the 10-foot side yard setback and <br />subject to the requirements of the Watershed District, and to eliminate the requirement that the <br />footprint be up to the 50-foot front yard setback. <br /> <br />Curtis stated if the Planning Commission is approving the building footprint, she would like the motion to <br />be very specific. Curtis noted if the home is moved to the north, it would be a conforming change to the <br />plan. <br /> <br />Brunello asked whether he is being limited to what is shown today or whether he can make some minor <br />changes to his plan. Brunello stated he might move a wall 10 feet but that he would stay within the <br />orange area. <br /> <br />Thiesse stated if the wall can be stretched 10 feet, then the applicant could push the house 10 feet back. <br /> <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 01/21/14* <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 11/18/2013 <br />[Page 28 of 35]
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.