04-12-2021 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, March 15, 2021 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:07 p.m. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:07 p.m. Ressler noted it is always difficult when there is lakeshore involved in setbacks. Erickson asked who prepared the 3D color graphic. Ms. Oakden said it was the Applicant’s contractor. Erickson noted those were very well done. McCutcheon thinks the big thing is the allowed hardcover, it is 25% and the existing is 22%. With the house being built behind the lakeshore setback, he will throw that one out the window because that just makes sense. Then it is a skinny lot so the 30-foot setback from the road seems kind of ridiculous, too. He noted it is a unique situation and that is why they are here. He clarified the hardcover is where he draws the line – they can do things but within the hardcover limits is his initial thought. Bollis tends to agree with McCutcheon as the hardcover is so close at 27.2% for what they are asking for and he feels it could be modified to meet at least the hardcover. He agrees with the setbacks – he thinks they need to throw those out on this one and if they could meet the hardcover it would be a yes for him. Kirchner agrees with the comments that have been said. It is a unique lot and he agrees the hardcover does not seem to be implicated by the shape of the lot, rather the addition and amount of the addition. Ressler said there seems to be support for hardcover and not support for additional structure. Bollis clarified no support for above the 25% hardcover but the setback requests seem to be fine. Gettman thinks they are all in agreement that the 25% is really the stickler, but he would prefer to have the reduction of the overage above the 25% come back away from the lake so it is not contradicting everything the Planning Commission has said on everything else. He noted the red area could potentially go away and the yellow area reduced to get under the 25%; he is not trying to redesign but it is back to a preference. Ressler noted that is the difficulty, they try not to change what is there but it is nice to have additional feedback if it goes further to Council. He noted they could make a friendly amendment or make a motion one way or the other with the feedback they have provided. Gettman moved, Kirchner seconded, to deny the application as it exists with the comments the Planning Commission has made. Curtis asked for a point of clarification, noting Gettman mentioned removal of the building addition, the red area. Is the Planning Commission specifying in their recommendation that the hardcover be reduced in a specific way or just pull the hardcover further from the lake and keep in the 25% limitation.