Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,August 19,2019 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Barnhart stated he would recommend each Commissioner take 10 to 15 sites at random and apply the <br /> regulation based on Options 1, 2, or 3, and try to apply the average lakeshore setback to each one to test <br /> each of the options. <br /> Gettman asked if this will be discussed at a work session. <br /> Barnhart stated a work session is not scheduled at this point and that he does not anticipate one in the near <br /> future. Barnhart stated he would like the Planning Commissioners to test it themselves because they will <br /> have to apply it on real life examples. <br /> Libby commented he would like to play with it a little bit before making a recommendation on it. <br /> Erickson stated he appreciates the efforts of Staff and that in his view Option 1 is the best option out of <br /> the three. Erickson stated he also appreciates that it does solve some of the problems that have been <br /> encountered, but on the other hand, he wishes there was a way to make it better. The ordinance really <br /> only works well if there is a relatively straight piece of lakeshore, which is not often the case, but that in <br /> his view approving it is better than not going with anything. <br /> In addition,the goal of a straight line would be to provide 180 degrees of view,which is probably not a <br /> reasonable goal. The end result will be that the City will have probably as many variances as they do <br /> currently,but it does clarify some issues and it is better than what currently exists. <br /> Barnhart noted 3026 Casco point is one example where the City Council did not suggest preserving a <br /> 180-degree view. <br /> Libby asked whether it would be sensible to reach out to someone who has a degree in geometry to assist <br /> the City. <br /> Barnhart stated what he is trying to avoid is needing an advanced degree to understand the City's code. <br /> Staff is attempting to make it understandable to the common person, and if a mathematician is required, <br /> Staff has not done a good job. Barnhart stated in his view there is a solution somewhere in the three <br /> options provided and that he would like the Planning Commission to test it. <br /> McCutcheon stated the fairest way to do it is from the 75-foot setback. If the lake was empty from day <br /> one,that would be the way to do it,but as long as there are existing houses, it is a hard problem to solve. <br /> McCutcheon stated he does not believe there will be a solution that everyone will be on board with. <br /> Barnhart commented it solves more problems but does not solve them all. The Planning Commission can <br /> also recommend no changes, and that he would suggest tabling it until September, which would allow the <br /> Commissioners do some of their own testing. <br /> Ressler noted Staff is asking the Planning Commission to weigh in on the various options. One of the <br /> most glaring examples is Hunter's Point, where there is a meandering shoreline and you run into <br /> situations where it doesn't fit into the box. If the City is looking at finding a solution to that type of <br /> situation,having a setback based on structure would be helpful, which would also be discernable to a <br /> layman. <br /> Page 16 of 19 <br />