My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-19-2002 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2002
>
08-19-2002 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2012 3:06:56 PM
Creation date
2/27/2012 3:06:56 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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 /> Monday,August 19, 2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#02-2801 KATHY MELIN, Continued) <br /> Mabusth asked why the vacated Kenwood could not be used. <br /> Melin indicated that Weinberger pointed out the vacated Kenwood property belonged to the <br /> neighbor. <br /> Smith suggested bringing the side deck forward a bit and screening it in as a preferable <br /> alternative. By moving the side deck forward to the 75' line and enclosing the whole thing she <br /> would have lake views. <br /> Mabusth pointed out that screen doors already open to that deck and the Commission would <br /> prefer this option, to encroaching any further into the 75' setback. <br /> Melin pointed out that the front steps provide a poor entry to the home and that the wood steps <br /> are unsafe in the winter. She hoped to clean up the appearance and make a nicer entryway with a <br /> bigger access area to the home. <br /> Smith suggested removal of the side deck and simply alleviating the safety of the front entrance <br /> with a better landing and side steps. <br /> Gaffron stated that the current steps offer a 4' landing. <br /> Mabusth asked how the applicant would access the proposed deck. <br /> Koelfgen indicated that steps down would be added. <br /> Rahn stated that even an 8'X8' deck with safe steps built down to the side would require a 3' <br /> landing before the steps. He questioned how the position of the windows would be impacted and <br /> pointed out that a 16' length was proposed to avoid difficulties with regard to the windows. <br /> Smith asked if the applicant were willing to give up the side deck. <br /> Rahn reiterated that what was proposed wouldn't add much, it would virtually add only structure <br /> over hardcover. <br /> Smith asked that if a three season porch is added to the front not exceeding 8'X8' with steps to <br /> the side what would need to be removed to keep the hardcover equal to what it was currently. <br /> Gaffron stated that the applicant would need to remove 50 s.f. elsewhere to keep it equal. <br /> PAGE 10 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.