Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 19,2018 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Mark Gronberg, Surveyor, stated he came into the project about halfway through and that there was some <br /> information from a previous surveyor that had the average sightline depicted in green, which has since <br /> been pushed further back based on comments from Staff. The original house that was on the lot is <br /> depicted in red and was 76 feet back from the lake. The original proposal is depicted in blue, which is <br /> located behind that. <br /> Further on into the process Staff said that the setback should be measured from the closest point to the <br /> lake on the two adjoining lots. Gronberg indicated he was a little surprised by that since in his 44 years of <br /> working in the City he has never seen it measured that way. In other cities it is usually the sightline <br /> distance between the closest corners. Gronberg noted in March, when he was working on the Judd <br /> Dayton application,the average lakeshore setback was prepared by City Staff showing the line going <br /> from the closest point to the lake from the adjoining corners. Gronberg stated he knows there has been <br /> some discrepancy in the past as to how the ordinance has been interpreted, and when this average <br /> lakeshore setback line kept getting pushed back,they Vogstroms felt they needed to request a variance. <br /> Curtis noted this is a Staff approximation of the average lakeshore setback since it was not depicted on a <br /> formal survey. Curtis stated if they drew the line from the closest point to the lake,the line would likely <br /> vary by 20 to 30 feet. <br /> Gronberg stated the ordinances are great when there is a straight shoreline, but when the shoreline is not <br /> straight,that causes some problems. Gronberg noted the sightline for the proposed house is behind the <br /> two existing houses and does not appear to meet the intent of the ordinance. The Dunkley house is <br /> approximately 25 feet from the lake and the other house is approximately 80 feet from the lake,which is <br /> quite a difference. <br /> Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 6:39 p.m. <br /> Kelly Hueler, 2715 Pence Lane, stated she is not sure what the comments were relative to talking to the <br /> neighbors since they were not spoken to about this drawing even though they live next door. Hueler <br /> stated it was their understanding that the lot that was permitted or approved was to be a conforming <br /> subdivision and that there were to be no requests for variances. The Dunkley home was granted three <br /> variances and there were clearly some legitimate reasons for practical difficulties. <br /> However, relative to where the original house was positioned previously,that house was completely torn <br /> down and the foundation removed. If the applicants had wanted to keep the previous foundation and <br /> work from that,that was an option available to any potential developer or prospective buyer. The <br /> applicants chose not to do that and the foundation has been removed. Hueler stated it is their <br /> understanding that the lines that were drawn is the way the setbacks have been measured and that the lot <br /> was to be conforming,which means there would be no reason to grant a variance. <br /> Greg Hueler stated the lot someone purchases is the buyer's choice, and if the desired house does not fit <br /> on the lot,they should look at buying a different lot. <br /> Kelly Hueler noted they did not object to the Dunkleys' variance requests primarily because it was an <br /> existing residence and they had practical difficulties that were legitimate. There is absolutely no reason <br /> for this lot to be granted any variances since it should be a conforming lot and there is a sufficient <br /> building envelope available behind the average lakeshore setback line. <br /> Page 2 of 13 <br />