Laserfiche WebLink
. • � Item#09-CC Agenda-OS/�4/07 , , <br /> ' . File#07-3259(Total P`ages 41J <br /> ������ <br /> NIINUTES OF TI3� • <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION � ' <br /> Tuesday,Februlry Z0,2007 . <br /> , 6:00 o'clock p.m. . � <br /> Smolik stated tliey are attenipting to remodel the structure to compiy with existing codes and to reduce � <br /> the hardcover on the lot. Smolik stated they have considered a number of different approaches to this. <br /> : project and that he has reviewed the project�vith both neighbors. . � � " <br /> Smolik stated by leaving tlie footprint where it is, it keeps the I�ouses in line and is.not out of character <br /> with the rest of the neighborhood. . � � <br /> Chair Rahn opened die public hearing at 7:39 p.m. . � . � <br /> There were no comments regardiug this application. � � � <br /> Chair Ra.hn closed the public hearing at 7:39 p.m. � � • <br /> Zullo stated she would Iike to see the liouse located further back from the road to get it closer to the � <br /> 30-foot setback. � . <br /> VJiner inquired what happened with the previous proposal. ' _ <br /> � Gaffron stated the original proposal for a new house was tabled by the CiTy Council and that the ' � <br /> applicants have chosen to go with a new developer and remodel the existiilg structure. <br /> Kernpf noted the previous developer had requested fhe Planuing Commission to deny the application <br /> so he could proceed forward to the City Council to gain tlieir input on the pcoposaL : <br /> � Jacobson stated the pool was there at the time the Gangstees purchased the property and that at the <br /> . time the�pool was orid nally installed, it could very well have met tlie setbacks and that the(aws on <br /> how the setback is measured from the lake could have changed. Jacobson stated the Gangstees would . � . <br /> like to retain the pool since it is an important feature of theii•property. . • <br /> Jacobson commented he is not fully aware of everythiilg that wei�t on in the previous application and . . ' <br /> that what was proposed earlier was a new house and not a rebuild. Jacobson stated what they are� �� ' <br /> proposing is,in part, a remodeling project and also 1 cebuild,and that it.is somewhat a matter of � <br /> semantics. ' <br /> � Jacobson stated in attempti�ig to retain the e�terior foot�rint, a sincere efFort���as made to reduce�vhat . <br /> was proposed before and that they did reduce tl�e square footage of the house. Jacobson stated <br /> � . PAG� 20. . � . <br />