11-27-2006 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF TIIE ORONO PLANNTNG COMMISSION 1VIEETING - Tuesclay,Febi�uai•y Z1, 2006 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#05-3135 ALL�N AND DEANNA 1VIUNSON CONTINUED) - Sjoholm pointed out the applicaut could locate the house further bacic on the pro�erty and build a tlu-ee- stoiy structure,but that the applicant is attempting to maintain fihe structure in its present location due to . the fact that the further bacic the residence is located, ihe more huuzel effect that is experienced. Sjoholm stated the elevation of the Wagener house is much higher than the location of the proposed consh-uciion. Sjoholrn stated he seriously questions wheiher you can see the properiy fi-om the Wagener residence. Nelson indicated where the pole was erected on the model. Kempf inquired whether the parapet is 27 feet high at that point. Nelson indicated it is, Sjoholm stated to deny the variance would be to deny Mr. Munson the reasonable and appropriate use of his property. Sjoholm indicated the�roposed location of the residence is in lceeping with the rest of the neighborhood and that this residence is located the furthest back fi�om the lalceshore. Sj oholrn indicated the applicant has recently purchased the property and�rould like fio construct a residence that takes . advantage of the cunent location. Rahn opened the public hearing at 6:28 p.m. Peter Johnson, Attorney-at-Law, stated he began working with Mr. Wagener on this property bacic in June of?005 and that they have been nying to be good neighbors. Johnson stated they do not want to see the encroachment intensified from what currently exists. Johnson stated the applicant was invited to see what he could do to reduce the encroacl�ment and that as of last weelc Wednesday they had not heard from the applicant. Joh�ison indicated they finally received a call on Wednesday fi�om the applicant's atioiz�ey. Johnson stated he inquired at that point whether there would be any changes to the plan to lessen the encroaclmient. Jolulson indicated the applicant's attorney infornzed him that he did not know vvhether there would be any changes. Joluison stated they would have prefen-ed that their concerns were addressed and that they were unable to aiTange a site visit. Johnson stated the average seibacic creates an expectation for every property owner that they can preserve sonie views of the lake. Johnson indicated the Wagener property cun�ently has beautiful views of the lalce and that the Wageners would lilce to preserve those views. Johnson noted the Wageners have resided on this property for the past 25 years and intend to reside in the dwelling as they grow old. Jolulson stated their concern goes Ueyond their view fi-om the living room and that he is stuimed to�nd out tlzat they have reduced fihe height down to 27 feet because he laiows his clients would have been happy to hear about that and that ii should have been the subject of some discussion. Johnson stated the idea tliat a hardship exists on tllis site with this type of house is a bizarre twisting of the way the ordinance is iniended to be applied. Johnson indicated the applicant could consh-uct a spectacular house wilh incredible views of 1he lalce without the variance. Joluzson commented any hardship that migllt exist I�as been self-created by the previous ov,mer. Johnson stated to request a variance now Uecause they do not like the low-swiuzg house or inadequate views of the lake is not appropriate since it was pre-existing and was a self-created hardship. PAGE 4