Laserfiche WebLink
0 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />HELD MARCH 21, 1994 <br />( #5) DAVID L. AND MARGARET H. VERGEYLE - cont. <br />Rowlette stated the Planning Commission was in the position of either denying the application <br />and sending it on to Council, tabling it to be reconsidered by Planning Commission or approving <br />it as proposed. <br />The builder noted the roof design was to be contemporary and flat with water drainage having <br />less impact on the lot than currently exists. The drainage would be carefully directed. <br />Lindquist noted there were drains proposed on each side of the house to the 933' elevation. <br />Peterson questioned if the drainage would be properly percolated before entering the lake. <br />Mabusth responded that the water would be outletted at the 125' setback. The City would be <br />concerned with the velocity and would want to make sure that there were no erosion problems <br />at the site where it outletted in the lower lakeshore yard. <br />Mabusth reviewed the "common sense" definition noting it would not significantly help the <br />applicant in this case noting the location of house to the 950 elevation was the visual and the 960 <br />elevation as defined by code. <br />Schroeder noted that this lot would be unbuildable if all codes were adhered to. He was inclined <br />• to approve the application if the house were moved back if it made sense. <br />is <br />Nolan was concerned with the fill issue. <br />Mabusth noted that by moving the house back even 10', technically it would still be in the bluff <br />impact zone but would reduce filling in the protected area. <br />Lindquist was sensitive to the effort the applicants have made in working with this property and <br />would probably vote for this variance if the house were moved. He expressed his concern <br />regarding filling activities. <br />Nolan felt the applicants were willing to come back to the Planning Commission with some <br />proposed revisions. David Vergeyle did not see any problem with repositioning before the next <br />Council meeting. Nolan stressed that repositioning would only be important if there was some <br />benefit realized. <br />Smith stated she would like to see the proposed changes before sending to Council. She would <br />be willing to look at street setback variances. <br />David Vergeyle stated that delays are costing them money and would like to see this brought <br />before Council as soon as possible. <br />7 <br />