My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-19-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
03-19-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2012 4:41:09 PM
Creation date
6/19/2012 4:40:41 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
529
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
MINTJTES OF THE � <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,February 20,2007 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> . (#07-3259 Lake Country Buildings, Continued) <br /> � street,fill in the NE corner, and replace the existing half-story with a full story. This will <br /> . result in a new second-story encroachment massing within 18 feet of the street lot line where a <br /> • 30-foot setback is required,but will eliminate the one-level wing that encroaches as close as <br /> 13.5 feet to the street lot line. <br /> 2. The new two-story connecting link will not have a basement connection to the garage,but will <br /> atta.ch the garage to the house with new foyer and living space above it. <br /> 3. The detached garage will become attached, and the applicants gain livable space within its <br /> roofline; dormers are being added to maximize the usability of that space. Access to the <br /> storage area below the garage will remain via an exterior door on the lakeside. <br /> 4. The bonus room appears to have the amenities to serve as a guest apartment(half bath with <br /> shower; closets; a separate sink with undefined possible.stove/refrigerator slot next to it)with <br /> the exception tliat the plans do not show a stairway from the main garage level to it. <br /> Applicants should advise what the intention is for this space and whether access to it from the <br /> garage is intended. Depending on the proposed use and access,a guest apartment CUP could <br /> be required. <br /> 5. The applicants have indicated the foundation has a variety of flaws. They have provided some <br /> initial design work from a structural engineer that suggests most of the existing house � <br /> foundation will be replaced. This appeazs to conflict with the derrio plan elevation views <br /> . which indicate existing foundation to remain. The structural engineer's plan suggests that the <br /> portion of the foundation that is nonconforming in terms of setback will remain in place,but <br /> its load-bearing capacity will be taken over by new pier footings and beams;i.e.,the <br /> foundation becomes a non-load bearing enclosure. <br /> Gaffron stated according to the demolition plans,it appears that most of the exterior first floor walls <br /> are intended to remain,but they will have new window and door openings. It also appears from the <br /> plans that the existing second-story floor will be raised about two feet,and portions of the second- <br /> story walls are to be saved. The architect notes that due to the existing house being balloon framed, <br /> the upper story walls can be saved and added onto. <br /> Staff believes that this project is following in the footsteps of dozens of others we have watched <br /> through the years where very little of the existing home will actually be saved and it will become a <br /> complete rebuild. The only difference between the current plan and the one reviewed last summer is <br /> that the general footprint of the base home is in the same location as the existing home. <br /> 6. Because the remodeling project extends outside the existing walls of the house and includes an <br /> addition,hardcover clearly comes into play. The current proposal results in less hardcover <br /> � than what currently exists on the site,but the pool still constitutes excessive hardcover on the <br /> property. The pool was constructed via building permits issued in 1984 that required the pool <br /> and all hardcover to be at least 75 feet from the lake. 'The survey presented at that time <br /> ' - indicated it would be 77 feet from the lake. For whatever reasons,the pool today is 67 feet � <br /> PAGE 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.