My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-19-2018 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2018
>
03-19-2018 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/20/2018 3:29:22 PM
Creation date
3/20/2018 2:28:15 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.
/
313
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
LA18-000019 <br /> 3.19.18 <br /> Page 5 of 5 <br /> Practical Difficulties Analysis <br /> The planning commission should discuss whether the minimal encroachments are appropriate, <br /> given the location of the existing structure,and the neighboring properties distance from the lake. <br /> Engineer Comments <br /> 1. The applicant should be required to have a service connection that is separate from the <br /> neighbor to the south. <br /> 2. The applicant should consider granting easement to the neighbor to the south as that <br /> properties sanitary service seems to encroach. <br /> 3. The drainage on the north east portion of the lot appears to flow to a drainage structure <br /> on the lot to the north. An agreement should be worked out with the owner to address <br /> future access and maintenance. <br /> Public Comments <br /> Both neighbors have submitted the acknowledgement forms Exhibit E. One has submitted <br /> written comment for the Planning Commission to review, Exhibit F. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Will these variances effect the neighboring vacant lot? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br /> 3. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the <br /> essential character of the neighborhood? <br /> 4. Does the Commission find standards for granting the average lakeshore setback <br /> variance are met? <br /> 5. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> Planning Staff Recommendation <br /> The Planning Commission should discuss the requested variances and if the commission finds <br /> reasonable findings then they should consider recommending approval. <br /> If the Planning Commission proceeds with a recommendation to approve. The approval should <br /> follow the engineer's recommendation to require the applicant to connect their own sewer <br /> service for the property separate from the neighbors. <br /> List of Exhibits <br /> Exhibit A. Application <br /> Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form <br /> Exhibit C. Existing& Proposed Survey and Elevations <br /> Exhibit D. Project Narrative <br /> Exhibit E. Property Owners Acknowledgement Form <br /> Exhibit F. Comments from the Public <br /> Exhibit G. Property Owners List and Map <br /> Exhibit H. Photos <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.