Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,September 17,2012 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Schoenzeit stated whenever there is new construction being proposed,the Planning Commission should <br /> require the property owners meet as many of the City's regulations as possible. Schoenzeit indicated he <br /> would like to see a 10-foot setback given the fact that this is new construction. <br /> Thiesse asked what the rationale is for that. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the City is essentially giving them 25 feet of a required setback. Schoenzeit pointed out <br /> if the applicants were keeping the existing footprint,they would be allowed to continue to encroach, but <br /> that with new construction,the City has some opportunities to require them to meet the setbacks. <br /> Thiesse stated he likes the deck as proposed because it provides a good view of the lake and the alley. <br /> Thiesse stated in his view it is a perfect location for the deck. Currently there is a garage that sits right on <br /> the property line. The applicants will be moving that five feet away from the property line,which is an <br /> improvement. <br /> Leskinen indicated she is in agreement with Commissioner Thiesse and that a smaller deck would not be <br /> very functional. Leskinen stated this is a very challenging lot due to the steepness and that she does not <br /> have a problem with the proposal. If there was structure below the deck, Leskinen indicated she would <br /> have an issue with that. <br /> Leskinen noted the current home is a two-story home and asked how the new home will change the view <br /> for the neighbor across the street. Leskinen asked if the proposed home is considerably higher than the <br /> existing house. <br /> Curtis indicated it is. <br /> Sharratt stated the existing home is 2-1/2 stories and that the proposed roof pitch is a little bit steeper in <br /> order to create space up inside the roof. They are also raising the first floor up approximately four feet. <br /> Sharratt indicated he did not do an overlay of the existing house onto the proposed house but that he could <br /> provide that if requested. <br /> Landgraver noted the applicant would like to take advantage of the wooded area across the alley but <br /> pointed out that it is a developable lot and that at some point in the future someone could build in that <br /> area. <br /> Levang expressed a concern with the impact on the neighbor's view. <br /> Thiesse stated the Planning Commission cannot tell someone they cannot construct on their property <br /> because someone has a view from across the street. Thiesse stated moving the house over 10 feet and <br /> providing that access allows a larger view. Thiesse stated in his view the neighbor will be able to see the <br /> lake between the houses. <br /> Cusack stated what is going to happen is the pitch on the roof is going to change and it will be a straight <br /> wall that runs down and parallel to the house to the east. Cusack stated due to the way his house is <br /> sighted,he will not be able to see over the top anymore. <br /> Thiesse noted Mr. Cusack currently does not have a view over the city property or the property to the <br /> west due to the large trees. <br /> Page 9 <br />