Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Wednesday, February 19, “!003 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />(M03-2867 DAMF.L ADAMS. Continued) <br />Mabusth noted that a bay indow on the design plan seems to be encroaching further into <br />the 0-75’ setback, and questioned the location of the second floor balcony. <br />Alexander stated that the plan the Commission had before them was misleading, in that, <br />the balcony has been set back into the buildmg envelope and would not protrude into the <br />setback. She piiintcd out that the ba> window, however, would extend 2* out <br />Wliile he had no objection to attaching the garage. Rahn indicated that he w as trying to get <br />a handle on the additional encroachment into the non-conforming setback. He also <br />believed there was ample driveway avaibble to allow some removals. <br />If they could hold the dormers back outside the 75’ setback. Alexander asked whether they <br />could adjust the roof slope to allow for a greater pitch. <br />Chair Smith indicated that the Commission would prefer that they leave the comer alone, <br />and not add anything further within the 0-75’ setback. <br />Bremer reminded the Commission that one of the latest work session topics focused on <br />massing and need to limit further cncroachr ;nt into setbacks <br />Alexander reiterated the need to adjust the 3:12 rooflinc to allow for ca.sicr snow removal. <br />Rahn repeated that, w hile he could support the garage addition, he would object to further <br />encroachment into the setback. <br />Mabuslh suggested that the Commission provide the representatixe w ith further direction <br />and that they table the application. <br />Alexander concurred, indicating that she would prefer to table the application and consult <br />w ith her clients <br />Chair Smith indicated that the Commission had difllculty finding a hardship that supports <br />further encroach lent into the 0-75' setback. <br />Based on her earlier obsen ations. Mabusth felt that hardcoxer in the 75-250’ setback could <br />be reduced by removing the drix exvay loop area. <br />Chair Smith questioned the status of the lakeside deck, indicating that noxv would be the <br />time to focus on what is pcmiittcd. the stairs, lockbox, and lifl serx ice. <br />Di'ttenK'rg suggested that a 4 ’ wide set of steps with a lockbox replace the deck, since the <br />deck XX as not shoxxn on an earlier !980's surxey. <br />PAGE 7 of 26