Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,July 21,2014 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> stated to his understanding there are 12 Special Lot Combination Agreements in the City and to his <br /> knowledge those property owners have not been served as part of this lawsuit. Thieroff stated they would <br /> need to be made a party to the lawsuit if someone is attempting to change their property rights. <br /> Thieroff stated the claim in the case is not that Special Lot Combination agreements are illegal but rather <br /> that the circumstances for the Special Lot Combination Agreement in this case were somehow unfair. <br /> Thieroff stated those are very, very different facts for each piece of property, and if the Court should <br /> declare that this agreement is invalid,the other agreements would still be standing. Thieroff stated if <br /> there was a house on No. 6,that would be the appropriate place to measure. <br /> Leskinen stated she does not want to drift too far into issues that are not before the Planning Commission. <br /> Schoenzeit stated in his view the setback is a critical issue and needs to be resolved. <br /> Schwingler stated he found it helpful to learn that there would need to be separate lawsuits for each of the <br /> Special Lot Combination Agreements and that any ruling would apply just to this one particular property. <br /> Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. <br /> Landgraver noted there are two issues before the Planning Commission,the lakeshore setback and the two <br /> and a half stories. <br /> Schoenzeit commented this is a difficult lot to build on and that he does not understand why the <br /> applicants would choose this lot to build on. <br /> Lemke stated his concern with the average lakeshore setback is that it makes the lot unbuildable and that <br /> there are also issues with the slope. Lemke stated in general it seems like way too much house for that <br /> size of a lot and would be out of place with the rest of the neighborhood. <br /> Leskinen stated she also has a concern with the amount of massing next to the lakeshore. Leskinen stated <br /> she also is still stuck on the fact that this lot has had a number of previous applications for a building on it <br /> and it has always been deemed unbuildable. Leskinen stated even if you look at the lot without the <br /> Special Lot Combination Agreement, she would still come to the conclusion that the lot is unbuildable <br /> given its size, especially with the average setback. <br /> Thiesse noted they are doing exactly that two lots over. <br /> Leskinen stated there is not an average lakeshore setback in that case. <br /> Thiesse stated the lot itself can support a house but the average lakeshore setback stops that. Thiesse <br /> stated the Special Lot Combination Agreement was put in place to benefit the owner of the property by <br /> giving them access to the lake. That has now become a detriment to the property owners because <br /> someone at the state level has determined that you can build on 50-foot lots. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the average lakeshore setback is what makes the lot unbuildable independent of the lot <br /> size. Schoenzeit stated in his view the building being proposed is too large and that the property owners <br /> bought the property knowing that there was this Special Lot Combination Agreement in effect. <br /> Page 18 of 30 <br />