Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,May 18,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> there is no net financial benefit for him to do this.He is doing it because he thinks it is the right thing to <br /> do. It is a way to solve problems not only for him,but for the City as well. <br /> Ressler noted Mr.Nygard, having been on the Commission in the past, understands one of the issues is <br /> identifying enough practical difficulty to grant a variance to the rules that the City is required to abide by. <br /> One of the difficulties the Commission is having is understanding a worsening effect when you have the <br /> difficulties, and that is identifying the boathouse going from a six-foot setback to a 1-foot. Unless he <br /> misunderstood,the survey in the application does not reflect the removal of 270 feet of hardcover, nor is <br /> there a"subject to survey showing what it would look like once it is removed." When it comes to <br /> structure, whenever someone intensifies an existing problem,that is going in the wrong direction. He <br /> asked if Mr.Nygard tried to find a way to solve the issue without doing that. <br /> Mr.Nygard stated he is going off the character of the land, and that is the thing that he always respected <br /> when he looked at these applications. The character of the land says the property line should be the crest <br /> of the hill, and that is why they are going there.As far as the survey,the Commission is looking at the <br /> final survey with the new driveway,removed sidewalk,removed turnaround, and removed illegal fence. It <br /> is an after-the-fact survey. He was not privy to having a survey prior to the removal of those items,but <br /> because he is an engineer,he can do a general calculation to figure out that it is approximately 270 feet of <br /> hardcover removed that wasn't accounted for in the calculations. He is not looking for any kind of <br /> hardcover variance because he is decreasing that. He is looking at adjusting the lot width and side yard <br /> setback for the boathouse. The one side of the boathouse has never been usable land,that being the 1380 <br /> property, for the 25 years he has lived there. The owner before him would scrape up the milfoil and make <br /> a huge pile of milfoil there,which built up the ground,and that is how he used that. It's not so much that it <br /> is a practical difficulty,but that is why he gave the Commission the"boundary by practical location" legal <br /> doctrine, because it is out there for a reason.The doctrine says if there is a practical location for that <br /> boundary to be,then that's where that boundary should be. He is identifying the practical location, which <br /> is given by the nature and features of the land itself,with the reasoning that is needed in order to be <br /> granted a variance. <br /> Ressler clarified that the crest of the hill seems to be Mr.Nygard's answer to the practical difficulty issue <br /> and his opinion is that the more correct way to draw the line would include reducing the area from the <br /> property line from six feet to one foot. <br /> Mr.Nygard said to be really right he would put it all the way up to the boathouse,but there was a <br /> grounding rod over there. He is going to run the sprinkler pipe along there, so he left a foot so that there is <br /> enough area on the land by the boathouse.He could move it back to two feet and jog it behind the <br /> boathouse if necessary. He was considering writing in, if/when he sells the property, a 2-foot easement for <br /> the boathouse so they would always have a permanent ability to maintain the side of the boathouse if <br /> necessary. <br /> Kirchner indicated Mr.Nygard mentioned that the final survey, dated November 12,2019, was after the <br /> illegal hardcover was removed from 1380 and that he was reducing the hardcover. In looking at the <br /> hardcover calculation worksheet for 1380 Rest Point,also dated November 12, 2019, from Gronberg& <br /> Associates, it indicates the hardcover with the lot line rearrangement would increase it to 28.43 percent. If <br /> his understanding is correct, it is now at 27.39,so it would be increased a little over one percent. He asked <br /> Mr.Nygard to help him understand and clarify what he was referencing with the documents not being <br /> correct or from a prior application and referencing the survey as being the final from November. <br /> Page 5 of 29 <br />