Laserfiche WebLink
r � <br /> MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 18,2015 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Dan Murphy, Kuhl Design Build, pointed out the location of the septic sites on the overhead. Murphy <br /> indicated the property owners are in the process right now to hook up to City sewer for environmental <br /> reasons and that they are just waiting to get an easement from the next door neighbors to go across their <br /> property. The line will need to go across three properties and the subject property owners will also need <br /> to leave a hookup for the neighbor down the line. <br /> Thiesse asked if that would change the setback requirement. <br /> Curtis indicated the setback requirement would then be 75 feet. The average lakeshore setback <br /> requirement would still apply. <br /> Leskinen stated having City sewer would change the setback from an existing septic system and asked if <br /> that opens up additional locations for the pool since it will not need to be set back from the septic system. <br /> Curtis stated it would and that this property has ample space in which to locate a pool. <br /> Murphy stated as it relates to the pool, their goal is to minimize the visual impact of the pool to the <br /> neighbors and from the lake. If it is located between this house and the neighbor's house to the left,the <br /> pool would be extremely visible from the lake. Murphy stated if that was the case, they theoretically <br /> would be able to build a retaining wall by the pool. <br /> Murphy pointed out there is a tennis court off in the distance. As it relates to the drainage, the area where <br /> they are proposing the pool is very flat with prairie grass on both sides and is a very environmentally <br /> strong drainage system. If the pool is located to the left of the house,the pool becomes even more visible <br /> from the lake. Murphy indicated they have spoken to both neighbors about the pool and that the location <br /> they are suggesting is the preferred one since the pool would not be seen by either neighbor. In addition, <br /> the adjacent property owners will not be adversely affected by the two additions. Murphy stated if they <br /> have to set the pool 100 feet back, the neighbor will see it and that they would like to leave the open space <br /> left open, which is another reason they are proposing to locate it where they are. <br /> Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 6:47 p.m. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 6:47 p.m. <br /> Leskinen stated she is less concerned about the pool than about adding hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone, <br /> which the City attempts to avoid whenever possible. Leskinen stated given the size of the lot, she does <br /> not see justification for it and that she is not convinced there is not another location. <br /> Lemke stated from a visibility standpoint, it makes sense to put it in the location they are proposing but <br /> that there are other locations available. <br /> Thiesse stated the pool is on a high point and that it would drain naturally with a lot of green space all <br /> around the area. Thiesse stated the City does not usually allow pools or hardcover in the 75-foot setback <br /> which makes it an issue. <br /> Page 4 of 37 <br />