Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 19, 2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#02-2813 MARK WELCH, Continued) <br /> Mabusth stated that while she had no problem with the alignment, if they are approving the <br /> substandard setback they have to be sure that emergency vehicles could access the side yard and <br /> recommended that no fence line be placed there. She felt the Commission should adhere very <br /> strongly to the lakeshore setback. <br /> Smith questioned whether the"prow" could be set back further into the house to meet the <br /> approved setback area. <br /> Mabusth asked how the Commission felt about holding the applicant to the original 660 s.f. <br /> hardcover that existed before removals. <br /> Rahn stated that he had no issue with the applicant moving further towards the street about 1 1/2' <br /> which would still keep them within the average lakeshore setback. <br /> Gaffron reiterated that the glass structure only could extend the additional 1 1/2',the eaves on <br /> top of that would mean that much more encroachment. <br /> Rahn stated that the design could be revised so as not to encroach within the 50' setback and <br /> asked what would happen if the City goes beyond the DNR 50' setback. <br /> Gaffron stated that Cities are not prohibited from approving encroachments of the DNR <br /> recommended setbacks, and have done so in some instances. <br /> Smith asked how vigilant the City has been to adhere to the 50' DNR setback and uphold this <br /> recommendation. <br /> Gaffron noted that in certain situations they have granted the encroachment. <br /> Rahn stated that he was okay with the 65' s.f. "prow"addition and a 1 foot gable overhang, <br /> which would keep the property well under the 1,500 s.f lot coverage allowed. <br /> Gaffron pointed out that the 1,500 s.f is a limit not an allowance to be met. <br /> Bremer stated that she had difficulty supporting this application since earlier that evening the <br /> Melin application had been sent back to the drawing board when they had proposed encroaching <br /> into the 75' setback with a deck. She indicated that 50' is much too close and she could not <br /> support the application. <br /> PAGE 14 of 28 <br />