Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,June 21,2021 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Curtis noted it will be about 50 feet from the edge of the street. <br /> Mr.Nelson noted it will look quite weird as everyone else is 100 feet back.He thinks it will look goofy <br /> and inappropriate. He said one would need to drive by the area to understand. He spoke with Mr. Lecy <br /> and received two different plans. The big thing is having a house slid 50 feet ahead of all the other will <br /> look odd and that is his complaint. He noted the rest is good and if they can push the house back—great. <br /> Ressler noted if they move the house back,they create a new problem because they have more driveway <br /> and therefore more hardcover. <br /> Mr.Nelson said it creates a big problem backing out on to the street as it is 50 feet out and people cannot <br /> see. He reiterated moving it 50 feet forward, in looking at the recommendations it said houses should be <br /> set in line with the other houses in the neighborhood. <br /> Ressler stated one thing to note within the code and guidance, it is within the building envelope and they <br /> could go closer to the street. He thinks they could go closer to the street and Mr.Nelson's feedback is <br /> noted because if the City Council decides it is worth revisiting those setbacks they can consider those <br /> amendments. However for now, it meets the criteria to build into that envelope.More often they see an <br /> average lakeshore setback, but currently there is not an average setback on the street side. <br /> Mr.Nelson noted he read the code and it said it should be with the neighborhood setback. <br /> Curtis stated there is an allowance to use the average when the homes are closer but it is not a <br /> requirement. <br /> Ms. Struck agrees with Mr.Nelson, it would diminish the character and the look of the neighborhood <br /> greatly. <br /> Vice Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. <br /> Libby stated regarding the safety of backing out, it looks like from the provision of the driveway surface <br /> that there is more than adequate area for the average vehicle to be able to turn around and drive face-out. <br /> Ressler noted as proposed it does seem to be within the building envelope and what they must decide on <br /> today is whether they are supportive of the 30%hardcover versus 25%. <br /> Curtis clarified it is the lot area and lot width variance,they are not asking for a variance for hardcover. <br /> Gettman said from day one on the Commission he has always struggled with the issue citizens have <br /> brought up which is the essential character of the locality. This one seems to be almost exactly on point <br /> because every single house on the street is set back farther. What is that practical difficulty that they are <br /> allowing for this single house to get the exception of moving the envelope forward. He is not hearing it; <br /> he is hearing the difficulties of a bad purchase. <br /> Curtis wants to be clear that the issue they are debating tonight is that the property is within the LR-1C <br /> zoning district(the 1/2 acre zoning district)which means one is required to have 1/2 acre to build. She stated <br /> they do not have 1/2 acre.They could build today if they limit the property to 25%and they would move <br /> the house closer to the street because they can build without variances as the lot is right now based on the <br /> Page 11 of 13 <br />