Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,April 21, 2003 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#5 #03-2881 CURTIS AND KATHLEEN MIDTHUN, Continued) <br /> Mr. Bricko stated that the entire home would need to be rebuilt to accommodate the narrow <br /> lot if it were slid back, and the home would lose its 1930's charm. <br /> Mrs. Midthun pointed out that a chimney sits in the center of the home, which needs to be <br /> balanced on either side, hence their design. If they removed a portion from the kitchen <br /> half, the design would appear off-kilter and they would lose any views of the lake from <br /> that room. <br /> Rahn agreed with Fritzler that the setbacks should be maintained. He believed that the lot <br /> offered a great deal more space and was hardpressed to allow this when there was more <br /> room to use. He felt this was a design issue and not a hardship. <br /> Mrs. Midthun indicated that the alternatives, including removing the existing chimney, <br /> were much more costly. She wished to preserve the cottage look of the property and felt <br /> that the design would be ruined of they were to pursue these other options. <br /> Bricko asked if footings could somehow be put under what was currently there. <br /> Rahn stated that he would still be opposed to the project, adding that, typically, the <br /> Planning Commission requires people to pull in new additions to meet setbacks. <br /> While Chair Smith liked the cottage charm, as a Commission, they could not grant the <br /> variance. <br /> Mabusth suggested consideration be given to a lot line rearrangement with the neighbor to <br /> gain the extra 5'. <br /> Mr. Berg indicated that he would not be willing to grant a lot line rearrangement for this <br /> purpose, since his lot was already narrow to the lake. <br /> Chair Smith asked the applicants if they wished to table the application for redesign, since <br /> it was apparent that the Commissioners would only support a 10' side yard setback. <br /> Mr. Midthun asked if the Commission could move on the application subject to their <br /> working with staff to meet the requirements. <br /> Rahn felt comfortable allowing the applicant to move forward in coordination with staff if <br /> they were able to meet the 10' side yard setback. <br /> Mrs. Midthun asked if they could move closer to the lake. <br /> Hawn indicated that if they were to move closer to the lake, then staff would recommend <br /> that the Planning Commission take a second look at the application. <br /> PAGE 11 of 40 <br />