My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-11-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
04-11-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2023 4:43:49 PM
Creation date
1/11/2023 4:15:47 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.
/
371
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
Otfiron stated the property owner in that situation has determined after-the-fact that the foundation is <br />basically worthless and that very little of the original house will remain following the construction. <br />Rahn stated he has a difficult time approving a remodeling project when the size of the footprint is <br />almost being doubled. <br />Bremer stated restoring original homes along the lake helps to preserve the rural character of tlie city but <br />that there is always a concern with using the existing foundation. <br />Capra stated due to the present condition of the house, it would be better to tear it down. <br />Alexander stated the exterior wails of the house are fine but that the height of the main floor is <br />substandard, which is the reason for raising the height. <br />Capra noted the residence is only 1,000 square feet and that he is only basically allowed to go up. <br />Rahn pointed out he is not saying the applicant is limiied to only going up with the structure. <br />Jurgens stated the main reason this application is before the Planning Commission is the amount of <br />hardcover on the lot, which is preventing the applicant from obtaining a building permit. Jurgen.s <br />inquired if the rationale for removing the second story is because of the substandard ceiling height of the <br />first floor. <br />Alexander stated they could piece in a foot and a half on top of the first floor rather than tearing off the <br />second story, which would help preserve more of the original house. Alexander stated that type of <br />construction would be more expensive than tearing off the second story. <br />Jurgens stated he would like to see the hardcover reduced to 30 percent. <br />Winkey noted they were denied at 30 percent on the new construction and that the Planning <br />Commission may not be achieving their ultimate goal of 2S percent hardcover by allowing the remodel <br />at 32 percent. Winkey stated in his view this is a rebuild and that the objective should be to reduce the <br />amount of hardcover to less than 30 percent. <br />Capra stated the cost to do a remodel project is thousands of dollars more and that it would make more <br />sense to construct new on this lot.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.