Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,March 21,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#04-3010 Theodore Capra, Continued) <br /> would extend over the existing patio. Capra indicated the gravel in front of the deck could be removed <br /> as well as the walkway to the lake. <br /> Winkey inquired what the size of the patio is. <br /> Gundlach stated she does not have an exact calculation of the patio's area but that she is recommending <br /> a reduction of 200 square feet. <br /> Chair Rahn asked for public comments on this application. <br /> There were no public comments. <br /> Capra commented he has recently driven around the city and observed the construction that is going on <br /> in this area. Capra stated in his view he is not attempting to do anything more than the other property <br /> owners that are undergoing renovation at the present time. Capra stated his current residence is an <br /> eyesore and has not been used in three to four years. Capra indicated he would like to improve the <br /> appearance of the property. <br /> Kempf stated in his opinion the first issue to discuss is whether this is a remodel or a rebuild, and that in <br /> his opinion this project is close to the 50 percent,but that he would consider it a remodel rather than a <br /> rebuild. <br /> Rahn commented he does not feel that people who remodel should be rewarded over new construction, <br /> noting that the new residence was recently denied at a 30 percent limit. Rahn pointed out the proposed <br /> new footprint is almost twice as large as what currently exists. Rahn stated the main issue in most of <br /> these applications is the amount of hardcover on the property. <br /> Alexander stated the reason for raising the roof is that the height of the ceiling on the main floor is 7.8', <br /> which is substandard,with an attached garage being added. <br /> Rahn stated according to the discussions at the last Planning Commission meeting,he does not feel this <br /> qualifies as a remodel. Rahn stated the applicant is not allowed to expand the nonconformity. <br /> Alexander inquired whether the garage is being considered as part of the new addition. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the attached garage is the same size as the existing detached garage. <br /> Capra stated it is slightly larger. Capra noted the current hardcover on this lot is 49 percent and that this <br /> proposal is a major improvement. Capra stated the 25 percent limit is unrealistic given the price of the <br /> lot and that he has eliminated whatever he possibly can. Capra indicated he would prefer to construct <br /> the new residence at 30 percent rather than remodel. <br /> PAGE 3 <br />