Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 19,2018 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Curtis stated it does. Curtis indicated she spoke with Mr. Gronberg about Staff's reading of the average <br /> lakeshore setback determination. Staff interprets it to be the most lakeward protrusion of each of the <br /> adjacent homes. Mr. Gronberg has correctly depicted it at the 23-foot mark. <br /> Libby asked whether there have been instances in the past or whether there could be instances where the <br /> meandering lakeshore could cause a practical difficulty. <br /> Curtis stated it does and the Council and Planning Commissions in the past have weighed all of the <br /> factors in each particular situation. In situations where a variance was granted to the average lakeshore <br /> setback, in almost all of those situations the neighbors were supportive of the encroachment. <br /> Landgraver stated he knows this has been a long process and that he does not want to get into what the <br /> prior stuff was since the Planning Commission needs to make the decision upon the right measurements. <br /> Landgraver noted the plan does show a variance to what was sketched before but that he is not seeing a <br /> lot of practical difficulty for this design and that he is not in favor of granting the variance. <br /> Ressler stated he struggles with it because he initially thought the line was where it was depicted <br /> previously and that everyone seemed to be comfortable with it. Adding the bump-out makes it more <br /> difficult because it was not part of the original plan and going back to what was understood as the average <br /> lakeshore setback is becoming a little bit irrelevant. Ressler indicated he was prepared to be in support of <br /> the application if the structure was in compliance with the previous line but that the bump-out changes <br /> that. <br /> Ressler noted Orono has a lot of lakeshore and that maybe the City should take a harder look at how it <br /> recognizes the average lakeshore setback. Ressler stated he would like to see that bump-out eliminated or <br /> improved in some way and that he does not support it as is. <br /> Libby asked what the nature is of the modified bump-out and what purpose it serves. <br /> Paul Vogstrom indicated it is a one-story bump-out and serves as a sunroom area to maximize the views, <br /> maximizes the property, and still respects the views of the neighboring property. <br /> Libby asked if physical movement of the entire structure would deprive them of this panoramic view. <br /> Vogstrom indicated he would not be able to have an attached garage up front and that they would need to <br /> do an L-shaped garage. <br /> Libby commented it appears there is plenty of room at the rear. <br /> Vogstrom stated all it is doing is creating a bottleneck and gives the appearance of an alley. It would also <br /> block the Huelers' front view from the north side of the house and they will be looking at a garage,which <br /> is something they have been opposed to seeing before. Vogstrom stated in his view it needs to be looked <br /> at from what is right and what fits with the lot and that they are protecting the line of sight. <br /> Thiesse noted the Planning Commission is responsible for enforcing the average lakeshore setback line. <br /> Vogstrom stated that is the reason behind a variance and that this is a perfect spot for a variance. <br /> Page 6 of 13 <br />