Laserfiche WebLink
����;--��". <br /> MINUT�S OF THE ' y ` <br /> � ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,February 20,2007 <br /> 6:00 dclock p.m. . <br /> 4. Whether a hardcover variance sliould be granted for the 75-250 foot zone, given that this is a <br /> total rebuild oii a lot that is nearly conforming in width 1nd has a substantial hardcover allotment for <br /> the 75-250 foot zone; <br /> 5. Whether there is any issue with attaching the house to tl�e eaisting garage that is slightly too <br /> close to tlie lot line. � . <br /> The Planning Commission should discuss the following issues: <br /> 1. Tl�e proposal is to keep the basic house footprint location intact, but removing the wing nelr the <br /> street,fill in the NE corner, and replace the existing half-story with a full story. This will restilt in a <br /> , new second-story encroaclunent massing witliin 18 feet of tl�e street lot li�le where a 30-foot setback is <br /> required, but will eliminate the one-level wing that encroacl�es as close as 13.5 feet to the street lot <br /> line. <br /> 2. The ilew two-story connecting link will not have a baseine�rt connectioil to the garage, but will <br /> attach the garage to the house with new foyer and living space above it. <br /> 3. The detached garage will become attaclled, and the applicants gain livable space within its <br /> roofline; dormers are being added to maximize the usability of that space. Access to the storage area <br /> below the garage will remain via an eaterior door on tl�e lakeside. <br /> 4. The bonus room appears to have the amenities to serve as a guest apartment(l�alf bath with <br /> sliower; closets; a separate sink with undefined possible stove/refrigerator slot next to it)with the <br /> eaception that the plans do not show a stairway from the main garage level to it. Applicants should ' <br /> advise�vhat the intention is for this space and whether access to it fi•om tlie garage is intended. <br /> Depending on the proposed use and access, a guest apartmenfi CUP could be required. <br /> 5. The applicants have indicated tlle foundation has a variety of flaws. They have�rovided some <br /> initiat design work from a structural engineer fihat su�gests most of the existing house foundation will <br /> be replaced. This appears fo conflict with the demo plan elevation views which indicate existing <br /> foundation to remaiu. Tlle structural engineer's plan suggests that tlte portion of the foundation that is <br /> PAGE 18 <br />