My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-15-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
10-15-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/16/2012 2:13:35 PM
Creation date
7/16/2012 1:56:27 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.
/
418
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
* <br /> MINUTES OF THE '� <br /> ORONO PLANNING COATNIISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, September 17,2007 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> OLD BUSINESS � <br /> 3. #07-3305 LAKE COUNTRI'BUII.,DERS ON BEHALF OF JAMES ZIMII�RMAN,2745 ' . <br /> SHADYWOOD ROAD,VARIANCE,6:06 P.M.—6:30 P.M. . <br /> Gregg Graten,Jim Zierman, and Peter Jacobson,Lake Country Builders,were present. � <br /> Curtis noted this application was tabled at a previous Planning Commission meeting following a detailed <br /> � -' discussiori of the proposal. The applicant is requesting 0-75 foot hardcover and lake setback variances in � <br /> � order to construct additions to the existing home and have proposed two new options. Option 1 includes a � <br /> pergola with an existing patio at the sound encl of the property at the point, and Option 2 includes a screen <br /> porch with a balcony above. <br /> On Friday Staff received an e-mail with pictures of the property attached,which was forwarded to the � <br /> Commissioners. It appears the applicant has responded to the direction g-iven at the August Planning <br /> Commission meeting by submitting Option 1. Staff feels the revised proposal is more reasonable than <br /> what was orig-inally proposed. The massing on the point end of the property has been somewhat <br /> minimized. The height of the structure continues to meet Code requirements and the rooflines are not <br /> extreme. There continues to be a pergola over the existing patio on the point end of the home. The <br /> . pergo�a does continue to the structural coverage level and minimally to the overall structural massing on <br /> the lot. <br /> In addition, Staff has received information from the City Attorney confirming the applicant's position on <br /> the easement for a turnaround. While it may not function as a turnaround for the neighborhood,the fire <br /> marshal maintains that a residence located 150 feet from the public roadway must provide a tumaround <br /> for emergency vehicles. The turnaround should not be narrower than 14 to 15 feet in width. This would <br /> require the hardcover in the existing driveway to be maintained at its current width. <br /> Staff feels the property is currently being put to reasonable use and to further the nonconfornuties with <br /> the proposed additions is�excessive. Staff continues to recommend denial. However, should the Planning <br /> Commission find that the applicant's revised plans meet their direction,then an approval recommendation <br /> should be forwarded to the City Council for their review. Curtis noted the requirements of the fire <br /> marshal dictate the need for revised hardcover calculations. <br /> Graten stated they have revised the drawings following the August Planning Commission meeting and <br /> have lowered the roof height by approximately 2.5 feet. The existing roof pitch at the front of the house <br /> contains a 4:12 pitch. Crraten requested the option slightly to revise the configuration for aesthetic <br /> reasons. <br /> Jim Zierman distributed photographs to the Commissioners depicting the property. Zierman stated there <br /> are a number of trees that block the view from the lake, which would help to block any massing of the <br /> structure. <br /> Peter Jacobson stated based upon the comments of the Planning Commission,they revised their plans to <br /> reduce the pitch of the roof and kept the hardcover at the existing levels. Jacobson indicated they would <br /> prefer Option 2 and that it is not against the norm to have a porch. <br /> PAGE 2 <br /> , <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.