Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,March 18,2019 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Curtis stated that is what the architect is indicating can be done. <br /> Ressler stated the biggest issue he is struggling with is going closer to the property line and that he is <br /> undecided on the addition as a whole. Ressler stated it is a small house on a small lot but he can see the <br /> merits of the addition. <br /> Thiesse asked if the City has an obligation to provide room for a person to stay on their property to <br /> perform maintenance. <br /> Landgraver noted the City decided it was okay on the buffer zone. <br /> Landgraver stated when you first look at it,the reaction is no way, because the homeowner cannot <br /> maintain their addition without trespassing on somebody else's property. On a relative basis, it looks like <br /> a little bit of a buffer was added in when they sold them the land, but that is also right on the edge of the <br /> lot. Overall, for the neighborhood, it does not seem as egregious and the applicant is not asking for <br /> something that is radically different from the neighbors. Invariably, however,the neighbor on the left is <br /> going to rebuild and they will ask for the same thing. Given the number of homes in the neighborhood <br /> that are in a similar situation, he is predisposed to approving it. <br /> Lemke stated he is in agreement with Commissioner Landgraver and at first he felt the same way with <br /> how it didn't make any sense, but in looking at the practical difficulties and the use of the home, it makes <br /> sense. <br /> Erickson stated the question is whether the proposed use is reasonable, which puts the Planning <br /> Commission in the position of needing to decide if a one-inch setback is reasonable. A one-inch setback <br /> has not been necessary for anyone else. Other nearby properties have gotten variances, but they have <br /> been five or six-foot variances. Erickson stated with a one-inch setback,they cannot do anything to the <br /> house without going on the neighbor's property and there would not even be room for a fence between the <br /> house and the trail. Erickson stated he has a problem with that but he has not figured a way around it. <br /> Thiesse noted it is difficult to construct a bunk room less than seven feet. and they only have eight feet. <br /> Erickson commented he would encourage the applicant to try to purchase some more land. <br /> Thiesse stated an easement would also be an option. <br /> Libby stated he was encouraged that the applicant has had an ongoing dialogue with the Rail Authority <br /> since that would allow exploration of those two options and that he was impressed by the architect's idea <br /> of the cantilever to accommodate the odd nature of what is being proposed. Removal of the shed has <br /> alleviated the concerns with the shed. <br /> Libby commented he just does not know, since it is so out of the ordinary and there are other factors in <br /> play, whether it should go right up to the edge. The property owner will have to have some very clearly <br /> defined permissions from the Rail Authority to maintain that side of the house, and as long as that occurs, <br /> he would not have a problem with it. <br /> Thiess recommended the applicant speak with the Rail Authority about the easement since the property <br /> owner cannot access the back of the house without crossing the property line. <br /> Page 11 of 13 <br />