Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,July 19,2021 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Curtis noted they are increasing the size and showed on the screen the red is the existing footprint. <br /> Ressler clarified the new portion would not be going lakeward but would be going inland. <br /> Curtis stated the same point of setback that is existing. <br /> Mr. Matasovsky said the existing structure sits on concrete which is poured and the new building would <br /> be up on posts so water,air, and everything can pass underneath <br /> Ressler is familiar with the property and noted the bluff is right upon them so they cannot go back without <br /> digging into the bluff and asked if that is correct. <br /> Mr. Matasovsky replied yes,the gradient lines are pretty tight going up and the only spot they have is an <br /> emergency vehicle path to bring a large golf-cart/four-wheeler down there in case of an emergency <br /> evacuation. <br /> Chair Kirchner opened the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. <br /> Chair Kirchner closed the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. <br /> Kirchner understands the good intention of this and the thought behind it,however,he does struggle to <br /> approve within the 75-foot lakeshore setback. They have had similar applications for boathouse structures <br /> in the past and that has been something the City and this Commission have drawn a hard-and-fast line on <br /> for the most part. He respects that there are disabled individuals and young children utilizing the camp <br /> and he thinks it is a phenomenal asset to the lakeshore.However,Kirchner thinks they would be ignoring <br /> a large factor in that approving this they could potentially have a homeowner come forward who has a <br /> disabled individual living in their home,or young children,and make the argument that they need their <br /> boathouse amended or improved because of a living situation within their own home on the lake. Based <br /> on the Commission's past history with these types of applications and his opinion with the 75 foot, <br /> Kirchner does not believe this is something that he could support but is open to hearing other <br /> Commissioners' thoughts. <br /> McCutcheon is the minority on this one and has gone on record multiple times.He noted they had a <br /> situation where someone with a boathouse and moved it back and City Council denied it;they just do not <br /> want any footprint to change within the lakeshore setback. With this one,there are kids involved,going <br /> up that very steep embankment,the Applicant is not asking for a lot,and he would be for approval of this, <br /> for the hardcover setback,the lake setback, and expanding the boat building. He likes the camp,he thinks <br /> it is an asset to the community,he likes driving by it with his boat and seeing the kids.Anything they can <br /> do to make that tradition continue and not turn into a bunch of houses,he is in support of. <br /> Ressler echoes McCutcheon.His question for Staff is do they set a precedent because of the different type <br /> of property that this is,and can that be something to lean on for approving such an application or does it <br /> still set a precedent for a residential application or is there another path they can take for a conditional use <br /> permit. <br /> Curtis thinks the findings that the Planning Commission cites with any approval or denial are specific to <br /> the property that is the subject of the application. She thinks they can craft their findings based on the <br /> practical difficulty but specific to the property and how it is used. <br /> Page 13 of 18 <br />