Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION ' <br /> Tuesday,January 16,2007 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#07-3254 MetroBuilding,Continued) <br /> Kroeger noted the garage is located within the 75-250 foot zone. Kroeger inquired whether the pool is an <br /> existing pool. <br /> Leintz stated the pool is existing. Leintz stated they looking at raising the house 36 to 42 inches,which <br /> ' would eliminate the low spot and allow them to construct some swales. <br /> Rahn inquired whether they are talking about raising the first floor elevation. <br /> Leintz stated they want to raise everything to the first floor elevation. Leintz stated currently the,garage is <br /> lower than the house. <br /> Kroeger inquired whether there is height issue that comes into play that the neighbor has raised. <br /> Leintz stated to his understanding the neighbor might have thought there was a second floor being added. <br /> Curtis stated the neighbor might have been concerned with the additional height being added to the <br /> structure within the 0-75 foot setback and the impact that could have on his view of the lake. <br /> , Rahn encouraged the applicant to discuss the proposal with the concerned neighbor. <br /> Kempf inquired how much height is being added to the structure. <br /> Leintz stated it is his belief there would be about a six-foot difference. Leintz stated the neighbor is <br /> located approximately 25 to 30 feet above the roofline on a hill. Leintz stated his men did attempt to <br /> discuss the project with the neighbor but that the neighbor had indicated he would prefer to get all his <br /> information from the City. Leintz stated this proposal should not obstruct the neighbor's view of the lake. <br /> Rahn inquired why one end of the home increases suddenly in height. <br /> Leintz stated there are some vaulted ceilings inside under that section of the roof but that they could • , <br /> perhaps drop it down somewhat. Leintz stated he would prefer to make that a hip roof. <br /> Kempf encouraged the applicant to soften the look of the house since it is located near the water and that <br /> he would not be in favor of any further encroachment into the 0-75 foot zone. Kempf suggested the <br /> applicant consider reducing the driveway in front of the existing garage. <br /> Gaffron inquired whether the majority of the existing foundation would be utilized. . <br /> Leintz stated it would be but the cap would be taken off since there is only a six-foot clearance <br /> downstairs. � • � <br /> Gaffron inquired whether a structural engineer has examined the foundation wall and determined that it is <br /> in good condition. <br /> PAGE 15 � <br />