Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> • Tuesday,January 18,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3075 Mitch and Kim Olson, Continued) <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Fritzler stated in his view from reading the Planner's Report this remodeling work is going way beyond a <br /> kitchen expansion and garage stall and is instead a major remodel. Fritzler questioned whether this is <br /> truly a remodel or a rebuild. <br /> Gundlach stated after meeting with the property owners' architect, it was clear that they are doing some <br /> maintenance issues, which can be achieved with a building permit only. Gundlach stated the reason the <br /> applicants are before the Planning Commission is because they are increasing the footprint and hardcover. <br /> Gundlach indicated it is her understanding the interior of the residence would not be changed <br /> dramatically. <br /> Rahn inquired whether it is the intent of the applicants to remove the trusses and framing and raise the <br /> ceiling. <br /> Olson stated they are raising the ceilings but they are also attempting to address an ice-damming issue due <br /> to the current pitch of the roof. Olson stated currently their ceilings are approximately seven feet high. <br /> Rahn stated it does appear to be relatively substantial work that is being proposed and that if this were a <br /> new home, the Planning Commission would be scrutinizing the 31 percent existing hardcover. Rahn <br /> stated because of the major work that is being proposed, in his view the applicant should consider his <br /> options for keeping the hardcover at the existing level. <br /> Olson stated in his view a three-car garage is not unusual in today's market and noted that he currently is <br /> at six percent structural coverage when he is allowed up to 15 percent. Olson pointed out that 62 percent <br /> of his property is unbuildable and that there is a waterway on both sides of his property that further <br /> restricts the property. Olson stated they did look at tearing down the entire structure found but that they <br /> found this option the least obtrusive. <br /> Olson stated he is unclear why the kitchen bump-out addition would be considered hardcover since it is <br /> not touching the ground. <br /> Jurgens stated there would be a roof above it. <br /> Olson stated there currently is a roof in that area. <br /> Rahn inquired how much of the overhang would stick out beyond the two-foot addition. <br /> Olson stated it is two foot something. <br /> Rahn asked whether it is their intent to come out to the fascia line. <br /> Olson stated it is. <br /> PAGE 17 <br />