My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Project Packet
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
B
>
Big Island
>
210 Big Island - PID: 23-117-23-23-0034
>
Land Use
>
07-3323, VAR
>
Project Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/18/2025 2:48:31 PM
Creation date
12/18/2025 2:46:32 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
119
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).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, October 15, 2007 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(#07-3323 Structures Unlimited on Behalf of Judson Champlin, Continued) <br />Langhans stated given the work on the septic system, if the house were built on the hill, it would be <br />even more prominent. <br />Winer stated on the south elevation, it appears the peak is 32 feet from top to bottom and that it appears <br />to be a 12: 12 pitch. The surveyor's certificate shows the grade at the front of the deck is at 934' on the <br />survey and at the midway point it is 93 8', with the back of the house being at 944'. <br />Langhans concurred the lot is rather steep. <br />Winer stated she would like to know the distance from the deck. <br />Turner requested Mr. Langhans measure from the deck to the peak using the southeast elevation. <br />Langhans stated from the surface of the deck, it would be 25 feet to the peak. <br />Turner stated you would need to add eight feet to that number to account for the space between the deck <br />and the ground. <br />Langhans stated existing is 13 feet from the surface of the deck to the peak and they would be adding 12 <br />feet. <br />Winer questioned whether the building could be made wider rather than so tall. <br />Turner stated it might be possible to make the roof flatter. <br />Winer stated she would like to see the roof made flatter if at all possible. <br />Zullo indicated she would also like to see the roof flatter given the closeness of the structure to the lake. <br />Langhans stated he attempted to make the structure look like a chalet and that he could go to a 10: 12 <br />roof, which would result in a loss of attic space. Langhans noted the side walls in the second story are <br />only three feet now. <br />Winer asked whether the owners would be willing to consider one large dormer rather than three <br />dormers. <br />Langhans stated it is not possible to construct it with one large dormer as he would be using attic trusses <br />on top of the existing structure. The dormers are sized to give them three equal sized dormers and <br />provide some living space. Langhans stated he is limited to a maximum width of eight feet for the <br />dormers. <br />Kroeger stated in his view dormers help to break up the roofline. <br />Kempf stated he would like to see some type of significant screening plan that could be presented to the <br />City Council. <br />PAGE 14
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.