My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-19-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
, � . ��1��`� <br /> MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSTON <br /> . Tuesday,Februnry 20,2007 <br /> _ � � 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> nonconforining in terms of setback will ren�ain in place, but its load-bearing ca�acity will be taken <br /> over by new pier footings and Ueams; i.e.,the foundation becomes a non-load bearing enclosure. <br /> Gaffron stated according to the demolition plans, it appears that ulost of tlie eaterior first floor walls <br /> are intended to remain, but they will hlve new window and door openin�s. It also appears from the <br /> plai�s that the existing second-story floor wil] be raised about two feet, and portions of the second- <br /> story walls�are to be saved. The architect notes that due to the eaisting house being bailoon framed, <br /> the upper stoiy walls can be saved and ldded onto. <br /> Staff believes that this project is following.in the footsteps of dozens of otliers we have watched <br /> through the years where very little of the eaisting 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 suinmer 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 eatends outside the existing walls of the house and includes an <br /> addition, hardcover clearly comes into play. The cun•ent proposal results in less hardcover than what <br /> currently exists on the site, but the pool still constitutes excessive hardcover on the property. The pool <br /> was constructed via building permits issued in 1984 that required the pool and all hardcover to be at <br /> least 75 feet from the lake. The survey presented at that time indicated it would be 77 feet from the <br /> lake. For whatever reasons,the pool today is 67 feet from the shore and its patio is 63 feet fi•om the � <br /> shore. The pool extends past the average lakeshore setback. It is Staff's assumption tl�at grade level <br /> pools at that time were not considered as an average setback encroachment but today they are. <br /> Gaffron recommended the Planning Commission provide direction to the applicants and then table the <br /> application for appropriate revisions and/or additional information. <br /> Smolik stated he did spend some time discussing with P(an�ier Gaffi•on opfiions for remodelin�the <br /> house and whetlter that would be feasible. Smolik pointed out the mechanical room curre.ntly is <br /> di�cult to reach during the winter moi�ths,which would be rectiiied with this projeci. <br /> PAGE 19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.