Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> June 20,2023 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Ressler asked about setbacks. <br /> Nye said the application slightly increased side-yard setback but staff is not concerned about that as much <br /> as the height and hardcover.The building would not be any closer to the lake. <br /> Andrew Iverson, 5558 North Shore Dr., said they are stuck in a unique property between the lake and a <br /> busy road. He said they have gotten approval letters from several of the neighbors concerning the height <br /> increase and the plan would not block any neighbor's view. They are alongside a channel and close <br /> neighbors face the lake.He said they wanted the rooftop terrace because they lack a lot of sunlight due to <br /> mature trees and saw it as a safe play space for their children since there is a lake on one side and a busy <br /> road on the other. They would also plan a rooftop garden. Windows on the front were converted to doors <br /> but the family hasn't used them because they go straight to the lake which is unsafe for children, and for <br /> that reason,they don't plan stairs. They noted they were within the 30-foot height restrictions and also <br /> don't have a basement. The applicant pointed out another house in the area with a rooftop terrace that he <br /> feels encroaches a great deal more. <br /> Acting Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:20 p.m. <br /> There were no public comments. <br /> Acting Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:20 p.m. <br /> Ressler asked about grade for the height,noting that the road is higher than the property. <br /> Nye said the grade is figured from the base of the house,not the road. <br /> Erickson asked to see the illustration of the actual proposed addition.He said he was concerned about the <br /> height issue for other properties and that the proposed height seems to magnify the setback issue. <br /> Schultze asked if the addition could block the view of the lake of people across the road. <br /> The applicant explained that the direct view is of the channel. <br /> Kraemer said he feels like this falls into the best they can do.He understands the staffs concern about <br /> height but noted that neighbors are not in objection. <br /> Ressler said he usually likes to side with staff but the lot is almost unbuildable and the applicant has the <br /> support of neighbors. He expressed concern about hardcover staying below the applied amount but said <br /> he would support the application because it is going up on a structure that is already there. He would not <br /> want to see any further side-yard encroachment. <br /> Iverson said when they purchased the house they removed a significant amount of hardcover and there is <br /> another old walkway they could remove. <br /> Libby said he still sees a problem in that there has not been an establishment of practical difficulties that <br /> warrants so many variances.He said he was thinking more in the spirit of the codes and how they are <br /> enforced. <br /> Page 2of8 <br />