My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-17-2003 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2003
>
03-17-2003 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 1:37:33 PM
Creation date
2/9/2023 1:36:26 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.
/
229
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 />Wednesday, February 19,2003 <br />6.30 o'cItK'k p m <br />(#03-2867 DAMKI. ADAMS, C oofinued) <br />Rahn stated that, in his vicu, the applicant was more than doubling the square footage of <br />the first floor and asked what the hardship would be to allow them to further encroach w ith <br />vertical structure into the lakeside setback, thereby incre;ising the massing effect <br />Chair Smith inquired as to the status of the structural engineer’s report. <br />Bottenberg stated that Building Inspector, Lyle Oman, had noted that he would like t-i do <br />more e.xploring of the block foundation in the basement, since the entire home is covered <br />by brick. <br />GafTron pointed out that the building inspector had indicated that the structural engineer's <br />report contained several assumptions without ever actually ripping into the wall to find out <br />if they were accurate. <br />Chair Smith asked what the next step would be and whether approvals could be granted <br />subject to fi'»^>;cr investigation. <br />GafTron stas. * tlM.t si'meone. either the City or the applicant's representative, would need <br />to i p into walls to see what is in there, it may or not be an issue, howevei, more needs <br />to be ki'ii,any work is done on the house or permits granted. He questioned <br />whethc »»pp 'I . , the house in the winter would be the right thing to do. <br />Although It ^uciurjl engineer’s report was a good start. C hair Smith stated that it was <br />not sufficient to Mt-.y the City. <br />Based on her e.vpericnce working on three other homes on Tonkawa Road. Alexander <br />assured the Commission that the home was a good sound house, not a tear down, and <br />indicated that thev would get the engineer to sign off on it. <br />.Mabusth explained to Alexander that, in the past, applicants have had to come back to the <br />Commission alter beginning a project, only to find their project was more involved than <br />first thought. <br />Chair Smith pt>inled out that the Commission and the City want to be sure that the <br />foundation will support what's being propi>sed <br />Rahn asked if the basement and first floor w ould be left untouched. <br />Alexander maintained that the only work being done on the first floor would be <br />remodeling the kitchen and attaching it to the garage. <br />PAGE 6 of 26
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.