My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
hardcover calcs and permit info
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
E
>
Elmwood Avenue
>
1199 Elmwood Avenue - 07-117-23-14-0059
>
Misc
>
hardcover calcs and permit info
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2023 5:31:37 PM
Creation date
7/28/2016 11:20:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
x Address Old
House Number
1199
Street Name
Elmwood
Street Type
Avenue
Address
1199 Elmwood Ave
Document Type
Misc
PIN
0711723140059
Supplemental fields
ProcessedPID
Updated
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
i <br /> The Harvey's of 1199 Elmwood Avenue have revised their plan so the kitchen will <br /> expand into the garage. The hardcover and structural coverage for the property turned <br /> out to be comedy of errors without the comedy. The surveyor made a mistake in <br /> calculating the size of the house and deck in 2003 and 2008. The hardcover calculations <br /> and staff report differ in lot size. The staff report for the variance contains a number for <br /> structural coverage I can't reproduce. It definitely doesn't include a 96 square foot <br /> storage shed that was mentioned in the staff report and the resolution. There was much <br /> discussion of moving the deck three feet north to eliminate an encroachment into the 0 to <br /> 75 but the depth of the encroachment was three feet on the end of the deck reducing to <br /> nothingl0 feet along the length of the deck. The resolution is internally inconsistent as to <br /> what size deck was being approved. The building permit was issued for a deck that was <br /> much larger than the applicants' initial request. The deck that was built was smaller than <br /> shown on the permit but larger than the old deck. Based on how the building plans are <br /> labeled I also believe there was a communication gap between staff and the architect <br /> about what the City considers a bay that does not constitute an increase in structural <br /> coverage. <br /> � r <br /> ��2���� <br /> �,�,y �X��S C� �.S <br /> ' "'� 1 <br /> ���e.e�ls �- r2�-�� s�' 1 <br /> , <br /> �' (�v��(c�v �-Ic.s <br /> ,, <br /> , <br /> ;� <br /> � <br /> ,� <br /> � � � <br /> �, , <br /> ; , <br /> ; � <br /> ; � . <br /> ; <br /> !- <br /> � <br /> ��� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.