My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-15-2013 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
07-15-2013 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/20/2018 3:27:22 PM
Creation date
4/6/2015 3:05:36 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.
/
285
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
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, June 17, 2013 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 4 of 9 <br /> <br />Peter Eskuche stated they took the square footage out of the floor plan and reduced the footprint of the <br />house. The plans are now below the hardcover percentage and below the structural coverage limit. <br /> <br />Landgraver asked if it would be correct to assume that the new plan does not move it further away from <br />the lake. <br /> <br />Eskuche indicated that is correct. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit asked if the house meets the City’s height restriction. Schoenzeit commented it appears the <br />roof is a 16:12 pitch. <br /> <br />Eskuche stated it does meet the City’s height restriction. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated Staff has not completed a full height analysis but it will be completed before the issuance <br />of the building permit. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit asked if they are requesting a height variance. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated they are not. <br /> <br />Eskuche stated the roof does meet the City’s height restriction and that the pitch of the roof is not <br />regulated. Eskuche indicated he does not know the exact pitch of the roof. <br /> <br />Goodwin indicated the chimney has been removed from the plans. <br /> <br />Leskinen asked if all the other setbacks are met except for the average lakeshore setback. <br /> <br />Eskuche stated they do meet all the other setbacks and that they are just requesting an average lakeshore <br />setback. Eskuche stated they have attempted not to impact the views of the neighbor to the north. <br /> <br />Landgraver noted one of the letters from the neighbors identified a concern about drainage. By removing <br />the existing driveway and changing the slope, Landgraver asked how the drainage would be impacted by <br />those changes. <br /> <br />Eskuche stated currently there is a sewer pipe in the yard that collects water from the street. The road is <br />pitched so that all of the drainage from the curb on this side of the street goes to the other side of the <br />street. Eskuche indicated they are limited in what they can do to change that. <br /> <br />Goodwin indicated they have discussed constructing a French drain and draining it towards the lake. The <br />trench drain would capture some of the water, pull it away from the street, and divert it towards the lake. <br /> <br />Landgraver asked if the tennis court fence has to remain a chain link fence. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated the owner could put vegetative screening up next to the fence if they chose to. <br /> <br />Landgraver noted the owner could also tear the fence down and put a hedge there since it is not a <br />protected view. <br /> <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 07/15/2013 <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/17/13 <br />[Page 4 of 9]
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.