Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Tuesday,January 18,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3079 Nicole and Peter Thomas, Continued) <br /> with one of the previous owners constructing a chimney on that side of the house that now blocks their <br /> view of the area where his children like to play. <br /> Thomas stated they are proposing to remove the chimney and replace it with windows so they are able to <br /> see their children playing as well as improve the access to that area by constructing a wrought iron <br /> staircase. Thomas indicated they are proposing a wrought iron deck because it is water permeable and <br /> would not alter the runoff in that area. <br /> Thomas stated originally when they submitted the application they did not know that it would be <br /> considered as hardcover but that they are now proposing to remove a portion of the driveway to offset the <br /> new hardcover. <br /> Jurgens noted the Planning Commission typically reviews hardcover on the entire property whenever an <br /> application is submitted, and inquired whether the hardcover that was installed in front of the main <br /> entranceway has been included in the calculations. <br /> Gundlach stated that hardcover was included in the calculations. Gundlach indicated the applicants did <br /> submit a revised survey that reflects the work that was completed in 2001. <br /> Jurgens inquired what was approved in the 75'-250' zone. <br /> Gundlach stated 7,433 square feet of hardcover was approved in 2001 in the 75'-250' zone. <br /> Jurgens inquired whether that is the amount that currently exists in that zone. <br /> Gundlach indicated it is. Gundlach stated prior approval was also received for the 3,203 square feet in the <br /> 0-75' zone. <br /> Jurgens stated as long as that hardcover was previously approved, he does not have an issue with it,but <br /> that he does not believe the amount of lakeshore constitutes a hardship in this situation. <br /> Rahn inquired whether a majority of the deck would be above 30 inches and whether it would be <br /> considered as structural coverage. <br /> Gundlach indicated the elevation plans that were submitted are not to scale and she therefore cannot <br /> verify the height. Gundlach stated if the deck at any point becomes taller than six feet above grade,then <br /> it would be considered structural coverage. <br /> Rahn noted even with the deck being counted as structural coverage,this property is well below their <br /> structural coverage limit. Rahn commented that it was his understanding the Planning Commission does <br /> not like to swap hardcover for structural coverage. <br /> PAGE 2 <br />