My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/18/2006 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
09/18/2006 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2012 2:51:27 PM
Creation date
6/19/2012 2:51:25 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF TI� <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday, September 18,2006 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#06-3231 William Dampier, Continued) <br /> Dampier indicated he does have some space in the current house to convert into a bedroom. <br /> Rahn wondered how this would be possible since Dampier had implied it would be difficult to remove <br /> what was already constructed. <br /> Dampier explained the picture shows an easily removed temporary wall put in place to close in the <br /> upstairs when he had to stop construction. It is the in-place timber framing that would be difficult to <br /> remove. <br /> Rahn stated he would not be in favor of anything over 15 percent structural coverage. <br /> Jurgens commented he might be supportive of some amount structural coverage in excess of the 15 <br /> percent. The location of the two adjoining properties created some hardship. <br /> Bremer moved,Kroeger seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3231,William <br /> Dampier,3550 Ivy Place,to approve a radius structure projecting from the center of the house <br /> toward the lakeshore,with the understanding the north lot line would not be impacted,subject to <br /> the structure being constructed at the ten foot point or closer, and further subject to the radius <br /> extending approximately nine feet in a symmetrical pattern across the front of the house,with the <br /> existing cantilevers being part of the approval, and with the requirement that the new semi-circular <br /> portion meet the 10-foot setback. <br /> Jurgens stated inquired whether the dormers on the house on the property to the north were required to be <br /> behind the setback when they raised the roof to add a half-story. <br /> Dampier indicated they were. � <br /> Turner stated they did have to step the dormers in. <br /> Jurgens stated in his opinion that would be the basis for requiring this addition to be moved in further. <br /> VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,Rahn Opposed. <br /> Jurgens stated he would have had an easier time approving the application had there been more detailed <br /> information submitted by the applicant. <br /> PAGE 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.