Laserfiche WebLink
MINiJTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,July 17,2006 <br /> , 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#06-3206 Ken and LoriJean Anderson, Continued) <br /> somewhat given the amount of storage space being gained with the larger garage but that she would like <br /> to see a further reduction in the deck. <br /> Kempf stated given the common area next door,the corner of the garage does not particularly offend him <br /> but that the deck could be further reduced. <br /> Bremer inquired what the dimension of the deck is on Plan A. <br /> Mr.Anderson stated to his knowledge it is approximately a five-foot reduction. <br /> Bremer pointed out even with the reduction it would still leave a 25-foot deck {including the part under <br /> the roof}. Bremer noted the applicants did not originally construct the deck and that there is no record of <br /> a permit being granted for the deck. Bremer stated she would like to see a further reduction of four feet <br /> from the deck. ' <br /> Mrs.Anderson stated the view from the lake of the deck would not change if the deck were reduced even <br /> further. The deck is utilized to store items used at the lake and is not visible to the neighbors. <br /> Bremer stated normally people are not allowed any structure within 75 feet of the lake due to massing, <br /> visual impact, drainage,as well as other issues. <br /> Kempf stated the hardcover for the deck becomes more significant given the close proximity to the lake. <br /> Kempf stated a 15-foot deck in the 0-75 foot zone is more than most people would get and that he would <br /> like to see the deck reduced to 15 feet. <br /> Bremer inquired what Staff is recommending for a reduction in the deck. <br /> Turner stated Staff is recommending the deck be reduced to 12 feet by 36 feet,with 7 feet of the 12 feet <br /> being located under the roof. <br /> Danbury inquired whether the 15 feet would include the 7 feet under the overhang. <br /> Kempf stated it would and noted the deck is south facing. <br /> Jurgens concurred that 15 feet is sufficient and that the whole purpose of having this zoning code is to <br /> protect the lake by limiting the amount of hardcover close to the shoreline. <br /> Bremer inquired whether the Planning Commissioners are in agreement on the garage. <br /> Kempf and Kroeger indicated they are not opposed to the garage. <br /> Jurgens pointed out the garage does increase structural coverage slightly. <br /> PAGE 6 <br />