Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, March 21, 2016 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />Thiesse stated if it is a clean slate, the expectation is higher that everything will conform. <br />Leskinen asked if the Planning Commissioners are concerned with the level of the hardcover for the <br />driveway or the house footprint. <br />Schoenzeit stated the applicants can choose where they would like to have their hardcover and that it <br />appears some of the hardcover can be eliminated. Schoenzeit stated the City has had applicants that have <br />had smaller lots and have complied with the regulations, and given that it is a clean sheet, he cannot <br />support the overage. <br />Melissa Santrach, Applicant, stated the biggest issue is the lack of off-street parking. Santrach stated if <br />you look at the larger picture, anybody who is coming to the home has to walk a considerable distance <br />from the street. Santrach stated for that reason they have proposed the driveway as designed because <br />parking is also not allowed on the easement. The driveway area would facilitate access in and out of the <br />property. <br />Santrach stated the only other option is to reduce the size of the home. If you look at the other homes in <br />the neighborhood, they are considerably larger, and the size of the home is consistent with what has been <br />constructed on some of the other smaller lots in this area. Santrach stated it is difficult for people with <br />young children or the elderly to walk that di stance to get to their house. Santrach stated in her view the <br />additional hardcover does not seem to be asking for too much. <br />Leskinen stated what comes to mind is that the proposed home appears to be consistent with other homes <br />in the neighborhood but that the lot size is not consistent with the other lots. Leskinen stated she is now <br />inclined to stick with the 25 percent but that she does not have a problem with the average lakeshore <br />setback variance. <br />Schoenzeit stated he would also agree with the average lakeshore setback variance but that the hardcover <br />should be reduced by 600 feet somewhere. <br />Leskinen noted it is not the role of the Planning Commission to redesign but that they can make <br />recommendations. <br />Lemke commented he sees it both ways and that the proposed hardcover is a reduction from what <br />currently exists. Lemke stated with a clean slate, it could be brought into compliance. <br />Gaffron stated the Planning Commission could vote to table the application to allow the applicant time to <br />redesign his proposal or make a recommendation to either approve or deny the application. <br />Peter Santrach stated he did not see anything in the City 's variance documents that talked about a clean <br />sheet design. Santrach asked if the City has criteria on that that could be provided for guidance. Santrach <br />indicated they went through a lot of work to come up with their design and that the first time he is hearing <br />anything about a clean sheet design is tonight. Santrach asked what the Planning Commission is looking <br />for. <br />Schoenzeit noted the property should comply with the City's reg ulations. <br />Gaffron indicated the property is allowed 25 percent hardcover. <br />Page 12 of 21