Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,July 23,2018 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> 13. LA18-000055—2709 WALTERS PORT LANE,BILL AND SUE DUNKLEY, <br /> SKETCH PLAN—Continued <br /> a building envelope that they are allowed and they will have to live with it. Walsh noted the City Council <br /> has managed the rules a little better than in the past in order to give more flexibility,but the question is <br /> how far past that is someone allowed to go. The City Council has had discussions in the past about what <br /> view someone is entitled to and whether a side view should count. Walsh noted if he looks out his side <br /> window,he will be looking into the side window of the house next door to him and that all kinds of things <br /> need to be taken into consideration when making a decision. <br /> Seals stated the illustration by Staff was very helpful in depicting the building area. Seals indicated she <br /> has spoken with some of the Planning Commissioners to get their thoughts on some things and that it <br /> might be helpful as well to have the City Attorney provide a written definition of a practical difficulty. <br /> The other helpful piece of information would be to know where the previous lot line prior to the lots <br /> being combined. <br /> Seals commented the challenge is once you get rid of the house,it changes things,and that in her view the <br /> City Council should not open that can of worms because then it becomes a question of how far back in <br /> time do you go. <br /> Printup asked if the three variances were granted before the new lot was carved out. <br /> Curtis indicated the new lot was not officially created at that point. The Dunkleys purchased 2710 Pence <br /> and then presented different plans and variance requests for each individual lot. Those applications were <br /> presented all together at a Planning Commission meeting. Based on the feedback and the timing of the <br /> applications,the applicants withdrew the other two applications and went forward just with the <br /> application on their home. The City Council saw that application in November and the variances were <br /> granted based on the site being one lot. <br /> Walsh asked if it would have changed the variances at all on the Dunkley's addition. <br /> Curtis stated the average lakeshore setback is currently based on the location of the Hueler home and the <br /> Keegan's home on the north side. The average setback next to a vacant lot is a straight line measurement <br /> from the neighbor's home to the lake. <br /> Walsh asked if the Dunkleys would have needed the average lakeshore setback variance either way. <br /> Curtis stated for the Dunkley's addition,the Keegan setback would have determined their setback if the <br /> new lot was vacant. Curtis stated she does not know what the Keegan setback is. <br /> Crosby stated to his belief it is 75 feet. <br /> Printup stated when this was discussed last November,the Council was looking at this huge property and <br /> felt there could be some flexibility. Then all of a sudden the lot line changes and a house is being <br /> proposed,which changes everything. The City Council is now focusing on the vacant lot with the <br /> average lakeshore setback. Printup stated he is not in favor of going ahead of the average lakeshore <br /> setback and that the City's code does not support it. Printup stated changing around the lot lines created <br /> that difficulty and that he personally has said no to other similar requests. <br /> Page 6 of 8 <br />