Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,June 21,2021 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> City's code. Granting a variance allows the Applicant the hardcover that the rest of the properties in the <br /> Tier 2 area of setback from the lake are afforded. She clarified they are not debating a setback variance or <br /> hardcover variance.They are simply debating: can they develop the lot and is there a practical difficulty. <br /> Barnhart stated they see lot area and lot width variances frequently when a property cannot meet all the <br /> setbacks. This property met all of those requirements so the only variance really, is the lot area lot width <br /> and the only reason they are doing that is so they can be consistent with the hardcover limitations with the <br /> neighborhood. <br /> Gettman brought up a property by the golf course that used to be a school;that property is just not meant <br /> to be built on because where they end up having to put the driveway.His purpose in bringing this up is <br /> that the character of the neighborhood is going to be altered because of what they end up doing today. <br /> Will it get altered if they do not do anything?Potentially. However,with this they are giving approval for <br /> a change to the neighborhood. <br /> Barnhart would be very cautious with that kind of comment. Yes,the neighboring property owners can <br /> build to the building setback line as this one can. He said to keep in mind whenever a new project comes <br /> forward there is an impact to the character of the neighborhood, so he would be very cautious in using <br /> that argument to deny a project because anything that happens changes things. He noted the Commission <br /> is welcome to make the recommendation of denial but he suggested to be cautious because that can be <br /> applied every time and they may back themselves into a corner in analyzing these applications because <br /> they are trying to find a reason to not approve it versus being more pronounced. <br /> Gettman appreciates that and reiterated with the old schoolhouse,he was the one who recommended <br /> approval of that but it was just voicing the concerns to the City Council as the advisory board that the <br /> Commission is.He said it is the same thing here.He does not see any reason for denying this;the concern <br /> is the fact that it is totally different than all other houses there. <br /> Curtis stated to process this variance and for the Planning Commission and City Council to review the <br /> variance,the Applicant does not need to provide a footprint or show the plan.They are asking if they can <br /> develop the lot according to the code-required standards. <br /> Ressler stated perhaps Gettman's concern is perhaps the City needs to consider a text amendment or <br /> something along those lines that may allow a little more clarification and guidance as to character of the <br /> neighborhood. <br /> Gettman clarified within the envelope and the setbacks. <br /> Gettman moved,Erickson seconded,to approve LA21-000044,3297 Casco Circle,Variances,with <br /> Staff recommendation.VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. <br /> 5.UPDATE ON JUNE 14,2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Barnhart shared the City Council updates. City Council approved the variance at 1509 Long Lake <br /> Boulevard, 724 Tonkawa Road was approved,the redevelopment of the project on Bederwood was <br /> approved,the variance for the deck at 1579 Maple Place was approved, and the Council approved the <br /> variance for signs at Orono Station as presented, as well as a sign ordinance amendment. <br /> Page 12 of 13 <br />