My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-28-2020 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2020
>
09-28-2020 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2020 11:34:00 AM
Creation date
12/1/2020 11:30:51 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
137
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, September 14, 2020 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 14 of 26 <br /> <br /> <br />Walsh said that’s because the neighboring property is the main house. He noted the lakeshore setback is <br />always to the neighbors’ house. <br /> <br />Barnhart asked to avoid some confusion and said the ASL of Tanager is based upon the existing Burwell <br />house on the right and the vacant lot on the left. <br /> <br />Walsh asked if the vacant lot is the 75 foot setback. <br /> <br />Barnhart replied the vacant lot would be based on 1700 Shoreline and Tiffany’s house. <br /> <br />Walsh said that is a defined line, the Council isn’t attempting to say it’s a line that should be created <br />because of any hardship. The line they are really talking about is Line A and Line C. He was trying to <br />make the point that changing from Line A to Line C doesn’t change a whole lot of regarding what is built <br />next to Ms. Burwell. <br /> <br />Ms. Burwell said she understands Line B and asked if it’s just assumed that a variance will be granted to <br />Lot 6. <br /> <br />Barnhart responded the goal with Line B is to avoid the need for a variance by establishing the average <br />lakeshore setback at the time of platting for the initial construction, therefore, no, Lot 6 would not need a <br />variance unless they wanted to go in front or lake-ward of that line and which Staff would recommend no. <br /> <br />Crosby asked Barnhart, compared to the caretaker’s house, where would these three proposed homes line <br />up visually. <br /> <br />Barnhart replied above the caretaker home on the aerial map. <br /> <br />Crosby asked if they’d lie to the North of the caretaker home. <br /> <br />Barnhart answered the marsh is directly across from the caretaker home and the homes would need to be <br />above the marsh. <br /> <br />Ms. Burwell asked how they are defining the rule with the 75 foot setback that goes into the marsh. <br /> <br />Walsh said there are setbacks for the marsh, noting the setback is 75 feet from the lake and since it’s in <br />the middle of the marsh they can’t build there anyways. In that case, they follow the DNR guidelines in <br />the setbacks from the marsh. <br /> <br />Crosby asked if it’s 20 or 30 feet from the marsh. <br /> <br />Barnhart replied the minimum is 20 feet, but the Watershed District may require more. He said the <br />homes couldn’t be built that close, anyway. <br /> <br />Crosby asked how far Line C is from the marsh. <br /> <br />Barnhart said he didn’t measure that. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.