Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,May 18,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> encumbering on the average lakeshore setback. Knowing the Commission has seen that in other places,he <br /> was curious where the structure is located at the property farther over from that neighbor. <br /> Curtis said she does not have an aerial photo that shows it,but said the applicant's survey shows the line <br /> from the previous house and pointed that area out on the drawing. She also pointed out the home to the <br /> north of the new home next to them. <br /> Ressler,referencing the drawing,asked, if the neighbor's house where the pool is would be gone, whether <br /> the average lakeshore setback would carry over to that and it would carry a straight line. <br /> Curtis stated Ressler was incorrect and that it would be determined by the home to the south and pointed <br /> it out on the document. She added if there was a vacant lot on either side,they use the direct measurement <br /> of the house on the built-up side. <br /> Ressler referenced where Staffs pointer was and asked, if the line was drawn to the left and the property <br /> on the left where the pool is did not exist,where that average lakeshore setback would generally be. <br /> Curtis stated it would be 116 feet,so it would not help the applicant's difficulty because they are <br /> proposing to be situated 107 feet from the lake,where they are currently 118.6 feet. If the lot was vacant, <br /> it would not help them. <br /> Ressler clarified whether the discussion was about lake yard setback or average lakeshore setback. <br /> Curtis indicated it was the average lakeshore setback. She said if there is a vacant lot on your left,the <br /> setback is determined by the actual distance from the lake of the house on your right. She noted the same <br /> rule would apply if there was a street on the left. <br /> McCutcheon noted the Planning Commission gets one of these requests every meeting and he realizes it <br /> is frustrating for homeowners because it is not straightforward, and it is frustrating when you look at a <br /> pool or building structure. He noted with the previous applicant they were fighting over six feet to one <br /> foot,and now it's 10 feet.The Planning Commission has to draw the line somewhere and there are rules <br /> and a lot of precedence set.Even though it may be frustrating and people wonder why they do not just <br /> allow this,the Planning Commission cannot do that. He would be in favor of denying the application. <br /> Libby noted he likes to contribute an alternative if he can.He said architecturally it is a lovely home and <br /> thanked the applicant for a very nice and articulate explanation about their life-style,needs, and why they <br /> want to do a screen porch. He is thinking about a practical solution for them so they can satisfy their need <br /> and desire for a screen porch and suggested that the applicant go back to their architect and take a look at <br /> positioning a screen porch off the existing library to the right of the library where it looks as if there's <br /> some hard surface there. He does not think there would be as much of a battle.They are going to build <br /> something new, anyway;there's cost in design, engineering,and construction. It would solve the average <br /> lakeshore setback issue if they were to design and build something to the right of the library. He has not <br /> been out to the house,but he can tell from the aerials that it looks feasible. <br /> Erickson said any government agency should try to be as even-handed in their application of the law as <br /> possible and avoid any kind of precedent that might be considered arbitrary which could result from an <br /> uneven application. He noted there was an application in the Walters Port area where there was an <br /> existing building with a foundation and part of a basement that were stuck into the average lakeshore <br /> Page 10 of 29 <br />