My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2005
>
03/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2012 9:22:41 AM
Creation date
3/9/2012 9:22:39 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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,March 21,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> 12. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION <br /> #03-3066 WILLIAM AND ANITA ROUSE,4051 HIGHWOOD ROAD—VARIANCES <br /> Gaffron addressed the Planning Commission regarding the variance application for William and Anita <br /> Rouse,4051 Highwood Road,which was reviewed and approved at the November 2004 Planning <br /> Commission meeting. Gaffron stated the applicants at that time were proposing to remodel an existing <br /> one-story house with crawl space that encroached into the alleyway and a drainage way. At its <br /> November 2004 meeting, the Planning Commission approved an addition above a portion of the house. <br /> The applicants at that time were planning to retain all the exterior walls and foundation and remove the <br /> roof. <br /> Gaffron stated following the commencement of work on this project,the applicants have discovered that <br /> the foundation from the early 1900s is in a very deteriorated condition and needs to be replaced. <br /> Gaffron stated the builder has already removed the floor and floor joists above this section of the <br /> foundation, with the ceiling to be removed, and that what will be remaining of the existing structure in <br /> this area are the walls. <br /> Gaffron noted the Planning Commission had originally approved this application as a remodel and not a <br /> rebuild. Gaffron stated in the past the City has attempted to hold to the 50%rule but that the City's <br /> ordinances do not clearly address this policy. Gaffron noted state statutes have also changed to allow <br /> replacement of nonconforming structures. <br /> Gaffron inquired whether the Planning Commission would have approved this application with the <br /> current setback from the alleyway if they had been aware that a portion of the foundation would be <br /> removed. <br /> Rahn indicated he would have required a greater setback. Rahn stated to his recollection the front door <br /> is almost on the property line and that the entire driveway encroaches into the drainage way. <br /> Curtis stated the driveway encroaches into the alleyway that the City has rented to them. <br /> Rahn noted in prior situations where the foundation is questionable the Planning Commission has <br /> required the applicant to re-appear before the Planning Commission. <br /> Gaffron indicated that was not part of the discussion on this application and it was not incorporated into <br /> the resolution. <br /> Jurgens inquired whether a basement is being constructed. <br /> Gundlach indicated it would remain crawl space. <br /> Gaffron stated a portion of the foundation was constructed in 1984, which is in good shape,but the <br /> portion of the foundation constructed in the early 1900s is the section that has deteriorated. <br /> PAGE 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.