Laserfiche WebLink
�F, <br /> " MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,June 18, 2007 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (6.#07-3296 TERRY AND SUZANNE JOHNSON,Continued) <br /> Johnson stated that she assumed the plan had been approved as submitted and was surprised when <br /> contacted last week by staff that the sweeping staircase had been missed. She stated that she had <br /> letters of support from the neighbors on either side and had not changed the original plans which <br /> did reflect this staircase but had not been drawn in completely on the approved survey. <br /> Kroeger asked to separate the two issues,the overhangs and the stairway, for discussion purposes. <br /> Curtis stated that during the City Council meeting in which the Johnson's brought up these issues, <br /> the Council seemed receptive to accepting the 2' overhangs,and even went so far as to suggest the <br /> Commission consider an amendment to the code suggesting a 2' overhang be a standard. <br /> Zullo stated that she felt a 2' overhang was better for ventilation and runoff and that she would <br /> support both variances as presented. <br /> Chair Kempf stated that, since it sounded as if Council was moving in this direction,he would <br /> support the 2' overhang. On the other hand,Kempf stated that he felt the 2' encroachment of the <br /> staircase for aesthetics was not necessary. <br /> Zullo moved,Winer seconded,to recommend approval of the 2' overhang for Application <br /> #07-3296,Terry and Suzanne Johnson 543 Park Lane.VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. <br /> Zullo moved to recommend approval of the staircase design as is and was submitted in the original <br /> plans. <br /> Kroeger asked for more discussion.He asked whether narrowing the staircase might allow for the <br /> same sweeping effect. <br /> Johnson stated that they had reduced the hardcover on this property by 1000 s.f. and thought the <br /> entire application was approved as submitted, only to be informed after two yeazs of planning at <br /> this late date that there is a glitch to something that has been a part of the drawings from the ." <br /> beginning. She stated that she did not wish to take no for an answer on this feature. <br /> Kroeger asked what sort of encroachment would be allowed if the applicants would have <br /> redesigned there entrance to be a side entrance. <br /> Curtis stated that the ingress/egress would have warranted a 3' encroachment had the design had a <br /> side entrance. <br /> Winer asked if this was the plan that was originally approved. <br /> Curtis stated that it was the same drawing,but that no one had caught the proposed flair until it <br /> came time to get the perxnit. <br /> Zullo stated that,at this late date,the applicant could not redesign the entrance to turn it into a side <br /> entrance and she would not be in favor of narrowing the staircase to retain the flaired appearance <br /> for safety reasons. <br /> PAGE 7 of 8 <br />