Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, September 14, 2015 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 14 of 39 <br /> <br />8. #15-3767 JON RESSLER, 3683 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCES – RESOLUTION <br />NO. 6537 (continued) <br /> <br />In addition, the overall footprint of the structure will be decreased and that in their view the impact will be <br />improved since the garage will be attached and they are not requesting a height variance. <br /> <br />Walsh stated this is a difficult lot but that two other homes on the road have done similar projects. Walsh <br />stated he is glad the applicant has reduced the footprint somewhat and that in his view the applicant has <br />done the best he can with a very small lot. <br /> <br />Levang stated she is not sure whether these small lots were intended to have such big homes on them and <br />that the two neighbors’ homes will be dwarfed. Levang stated she is not sure how that will impact the <br />neighbors’ light and view. <br /> <br />Ressler noted they have received letters of support from the neighbors. <br /> <br />McMillan stated if they were constructing a new home from scratch, they would not be allowed the <br />structural coverage and average lakeshore setback variances. McMillan stated in her view a house could <br />fit in there without two of the variances. <br /> <br />McMillan noted if the applicant constructs the 1-1/2 story, they would actually be gaining more square <br />footage than if they construct a new house. McMillan stated she is using the tear-down/build over as the <br />comparison piece to see what this lot can sustain. McMillan stated the two variances she is struggling <br />with are the average lakeshore setback and the hardcover and how to mitigate that. McMillan stated <br />everybody else in Orono who has the space is not allowed to construct 35 feet from the lake and must be <br />beyond the 75-foot setback. McMillan stated there has to be a balance between that and what is being <br />requested and how much massing should be allowed. <br /> <br />McMillan stated in the past the City has required people to conform to the average lakeshore setback and <br />push the second story out of that area. McMillan stated she is looking for compromises and that in her <br />view pulling it out of the average lakeshore setback would be a possibility even though it might make for <br />a more difficult design. McMillan stated she is struggling with the idea of maxing out the square footage <br />of this lot and that it would not be allowed if the house was torn down and rebuilt. <br /> <br />Ressler stated it would be impossible to rebuild on that lot without variances. <br /> <br />McMillan stated it is a matter of how many variances should be granted. <br />Walsh noted this is not new construction and that the applicant will be adding a minor second story, <br />which will make it a better house. Walsh stated they are not asking to build a boathouse. <br /> <br />Levang asked what will be in the average setback. <br /> <br />Ressler indicated it will be a covered porch. <br /> <br />Levang asked what would happen if that went away or whether it could be pulled back. <br /> <br />Ressler stated he is not sure that will benefit the neighbors since their homes are basically facing the other <br />direction. Ressler stated the neighbor has a deck that is within the average lakeshore setback.