My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-19-03 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
02-19-03 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/24/2012 9:32:41 AM
Creation date
2/24/2012 9:32:41 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
• <br /> MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Wednesday, February 19, 2003 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#03-2867 DANIEL ADAMS, Continued) <br /> Mabusth noted that a bay window 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 building envelope and would not protrude into the <br /> setback. She pointed out that the bay window, however, would extend 2' out. <br /> While he had no objection to attaching the garage, Rahn indicated that he was trying to get <br /> a handle on the additional encroachment into the non-conforming setback. He also <br /> believed there was ample driveway available 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 corner 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 encroachment into setbacks. <br /> Alexander reiterated the need to adjust the 3:12 roofline to allow for easier snow removal. <br /> Rahn repeated that, while he could support the garage addition, he would object to further <br /> encroachment into the setback. <br /> Mabusth suggested that the Commission provide the representative with further direction <br /> and that they table the application. <br /> Alexander concurred, indicating that she would prefer to table the application and consult <br /> with her clients. <br /> Chair Smith indicated that the Commission had difficulty finding a hardship that supports <br /> further encroachment into the 0-75' setback. <br /> Based on her earlier observations, Mabusth felt that hardcover in the 75-250' setback could <br /> be reduced by removing the driveway loop area. <br /> Chair Smith questioned the status of the lakeside deck, indicating that now would be the <br /> time to focus on what is permitted, the stairs, lockbox, and lift service. <br /> Bottenberg suggested that a 4' wide set of steps with a lockbox replace the deck, since the <br /> deck was not shown on an earlier 1980's survey. <br /> PAGE 7 of 26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.