Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, March 18, 2019 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <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 /> <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 /> <br />Thiesse noted it is difficult to construct a bunk room less than seven feet. and they only have eight feet. <br /> <br />Erickson commented he would encourage the applicant to try to purchase some more land. <br /> <br />Thiesse stated an easement would also be an option. <br /> <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 /> <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 /> <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 />Landgraver stated given the other landscaping and structures by the neighbors, the Rail Authority <br />probably is in agreement. <br /> <br />Ressler stated without redesigning it himself, the architect could perhaps bring it back to seven feet so <br />there is some room there. <br /> <br />Lemke moved to recommend approval of Application No. LA18-000011, Julie Lensing, 3349 <br />Crystal Bay Road as proposed, granting of a hardcover variance and a rear yard setback variance, <br />subject to Staff recommendations. <br /> <br />Landgraver stated the proposed setback of 1.2 inches does not account for the homeowner’s need for <br />access without trespassing on HCRRA property. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated Staff will follow up with the HCRRA representative and will assist the applicant with the <br />maintenance access. <br /> <br />Landgraver seconded. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 2, Erickson and Ressler Opposed.