My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-16-2020 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2020-2029
>
2020
>
11-16-2020 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/22/2021 9:20:09 AM
Creation date
1/22/2021 9:19:55 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,November 16,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> should be able to change a deck to a screen porch, or put a roof over it, or make it a room or dining room <br /> as the client wants to do. He thinks this is a reasonable request and they are trying to do their best to <br /> maintain the intent of the City's laws. <br /> Gettman asked regarding the staircase; he appreciates Mr. McNeal's candor that they are trying to keep <br /> within the same footprint but how did the staircase end up going outside of that. <br /> Mr. McNeal replied mostly because the stairs are at a sharp angle and it immediately goes down. The <br /> grade is raised up there to begin with, so sightline-wise, it really is an insignificant portion. For all <br /> practical purposes,they do not need the stairs,but it is an ideal. <br /> Gettman asked if there were stairs there before. <br /> Mr. McNeal replied in the affirmative;there were stairs there before from the existing deck. <br /> Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:38 p.m. <br /> Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:38 p.m. <br /> Chair Ressler asked Ms. Curtis on slide 17 of the combined file it shows the setback line, taking into <br /> consideration the lagoon and his question is if that lagoon was not there, the average lakeshore setback <br /> would be more intensified so the lagoon is actually improving the situation or is he reading it wrong. <br /> Ms. Curtis replied if the lagoon was not there,the house would likely be in this area [noted onscreen], as <br /> they would not build back here [noted onscreen] as a choice. <br /> Kirchner asked on the survey,there is a curved-dashed line running under the stairs and asked what that <br /> is. <br /> Ms. Curtis asked Mr. McNeal if that is landscaping. <br /> Mr. McNeal answered it is a grading line. <br /> Kirchner noted the stairs do appear to extend forward lakeward of the home and that would be the only <br /> concern he has with this that they would be allowing the stairs to go further lakeward and worsening the <br /> situation from what it already is. Based on the stairs he would not support it,but other than that he is <br /> generally supportive of it. <br /> Chair Ressler said the only concern he has is with the lagoon there the neighboring property is rather <br /> limited for its view. It certainly is helpful that the neighbor is supportive of it and he asked if 3135 North <br /> Shore Drive is the letter of support. <br /> Ms. Curtis replied that is true. <br /> Chair Ressler noted that certainly helps. Average lakeshore setback versus lake yard setback versus side <br /> setback is one that the Planning Commission has been generally agreeable with in the past. In situations <br /> like this it is difficult to have everything fit into the boxes with the undulating shorelines. Those are the <br /> only concerns he has. <br /> Page 7 of 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.