Laserfiche WebLink
H <br />r <br />I ■r <br />H' <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 <br />ZONING FILE #1493/#1570-DOWNEY CONTINUED <br />contractor had included the deck in the permit for the garage, <br />was constructed at the same time. The deck is in fact in <br />front of the average lakeshore setback line." <br />Bellows added, "Portions of the principal structure are <br />located in front of the average lakeshore setback line." <br />Mr. Downey stated that he has letters from the neighbors on <br />both sides of his property indicating that they have no <br />objections. <br />Hanson said, "It appears to me that the deck does not <br />obscure the neighbors* views. The standard issues that we <br />address when looking at the average lakeshore setback, in this <br />case are almost irrelevant." <br />Bellows concurred with Hanson but stated that there are many <br />other aspects of this property that must also be addressed. She <br />asked Mabusth to proceed with the review of application #1570. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were <br />duly noted. <br />Mabusth reviewed the history of this property relating to <br />the cause of Mr. Downey's drainage problems (see Jeanne Mabusth*s <br />memo dated August 15, 1990). She said, "I have no indication of <br />what resulted from the litigation that occurred. The City <br />Engineer and I looked at the property and did not see signs of <br />••vare erosion, which one would expect due to the steep slopes." <br />Mabusth displayed the sketch showing the three-tier plan Mr. <br />Downey is proposing. She said, "I believe that very little fill <br />would be brought in based on the proposed elevations." <br />Mr. Downey said, "My landscape architect has indicated to me <br />that 40 yards of fill will be needed." <br />Johnson asked Mabusth to show where the cuts are to be made. <br />Mabusth indicated where cuts will be made and said, "There <br />are already severe, exposed cuts behind the boat house that will <br />require a retaining wall." <br />Downey referred to the conditions and provisions set forth <br />in Resolution #1079 (Holzer application-property to immediate <br />south). He said, "That appears to be the final plan and it shows <br />where drainage is supposed to go. If you look at the recent <br />survey, you can see that is not occurring." <br />Bellows said, "In my opinion, the condition created by the <br />project next door should be corrected. There is no other place <br />- 4 - <br />fe„.