Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> November 21,2022 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Mr. Eskuche is willing to make an attempt. <br /> Ressler clarified the Commission can give feedback and Mr.Eskuche can bring an amended proposal to <br /> the City Council. Ressler would be supportive of this if they made those changes discussed. <br /> Libby noted in going up over existing is kind of a moot point when there is already such an encroachment <br /> into the 75 foot setback.Any massing will not conform to the Comprehensive Plan and the City does not <br /> add encroachments into the 75 foot setback. <br /> Chair McCutcheon is uneasy with going up and blocking lake view.He would not be in support of the <br /> application. <br /> Kraemer asked if they could design the chimney within the footprint.He asked if by going upwards they <br /> will be blocking someone else's lake views and thinks City Council would want to see a study on that. <br /> Community Development Director Oakden clarified that typically the 75 foot setback is the stricter and <br /> the average lakeshore setback(ALS)is then set further away from the lake being the limiting factor for a <br /> building envelope. This lot is unique in that the ALS is actually the closer setback to the lake and the 75 <br /> foot setback is the more-strict setback.The chimney,front door porch addition,and garage space area are <br /> all footprint expansions.Regarding the second story expansion which is directly upward,the Commission <br /> has acted in support of second story additions in the ALS but oftentimes that does not overlap within the <br /> 75 foot setback, as well.This is a very unique layout in that the second story is both in the ALS and in the <br /> 75 foot setback in this scenario. <br /> Ressler is in support of adding massing but would like to see no addition within the ALS.Anything <br /> behind the ALS he would be in support of, as long as it stays in the conformities of structure,hardcover, <br /> and is not increasing or worsening that situation. <br /> Chair McCutcheon's position is adding massing behind the blue line onscreen but not to increase <br /> hardcover which is very hard to do. <br /> Ressler noted he cannot approve as applied but thinks they could entertain a motion to decline with <br /> feedback for the Applicant to revise plans. He noted it sounds like Kraemer is in support of the <br /> application as applied. <br /> Chair McCutcheon would decline with feedback that any structure added should be behind the average <br /> lakeshore setback(blue line). <br /> Libby tends to agree with Staffs initial denial.He agrees with nothing beyond the average lakeshore <br /> setback and certainly nothing that would add encroachment into the 75 foot setback. <br /> Libby moved,Ressler seconded,to deny LA22-000055 Eskuche Design,3838 Cherry Avenue, <br /> Variances.VOTE: Ayes:3,Nays 1 (Kraemer). <br /> 5. LA22-000056 PATRICK REGAN WITH JDD STUDIO,200 WOODHILL ROAD, <br /> REQUESTS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR AN ADDITION <br /> TO AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE RELATED TO A GOLF COURSE USE. <br /> Page 12 of 13 <br />