Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, October 16, 2017 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />Leskinen asked if they were aware that a permit is required for any work along the lakeshore, such as tree <br />removal and boulder removal. <br />Sue Dunkley stated she is now. <br />Howry stated they did not want them to do that and that they corrected it as fast as we could. <br />William Dunkley stated they did not demo anything until after they got a permit. <br />Schoenzeit stated they are not talking about the salvage of the items in the house but that they are <br />speaking of the work within 75 feet of the lakeshore. Schoenzeit stated the landscape architect should <br />have known better and that type of work is completely unacceptable. Schoenzeit stated it is important <br />that any project in the future respect that no work is to be done in the 0-75 foot zone and that he wants to <br />hear how that work will be undone. <br />Schoenzeit stated he also sees as part of this project that the applicant has managed to get their dream <br />property but that he would see if they can make the project work with the one lot. Schoenzeit stated the <br />attempt to recoup their costs for the property appears to be pushing the project over the edge. <br />Paul Vogstrom stated going back to the variances, they can do the project to conform with city codes, <br />which means that they have to construct a 50 -foot wide road with a cul-de-sac. Vogstrom noted he had <br />nothing to do with the work in the 0-75 foot zone and that he does not know why that happened. <br />Vogstrom commented the project makes sense but that the neighbors would rather not have them meet <br />code because it means they will have to construct a really wide driveway. Vogstrom indicated they are <br />trying to propose something that makes sense for the whole neighborhood, the Huelers and the lake area, <br />and that in his view this project does that. <br />William Dunkley commented the other neighbors feel their project is fine. <br />Vogstrom stated this project is a perfect example of why a variance is needed for the road. Vogstrom <br />noted they are creating a new access to Walters Port, which will help the residents on that road. <br />Vogstrom indicated they did have conversations with the neighbors prior to doing this project and that <br />everybody is happy about it but that there is a disconnect between the Huelers and the Dunkleys. <br />Thiesse noted there are a lot of variances that are being requested. Thiesse asked how many variances are <br />being requested. <br />Curtis noted the City does not require a 50 -foot paved road as part of the platting of an outlot for either a <br />private road or an improved private driveway but that the City requires a 50 -foot easement. Curtis stated <br />in a redevelopment like this, it might be appropriate for some type of variance, but that some of the other <br />variances are not appropriate because they are in complete contradiction to the requirements of the City. <br />It is Staff's belief that the applicants can work out a solution with the fire department to take the place of <br />the cul-de-sac. <br />Thiesse stated if they were not to access the existing house from Pence and kept it off of Walters Port, <br />that variance would be eliminated. <br />Page 9 of 32 <br />