Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 16,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3112 Loren and Stacey Schoenzeit,Continued) <br /> Fritzler stated he would be in favor of following Staff's recommendations. <br /> Bremer noted some of the issues have been resolved and questioned if this application should still be <br /> tabled. <br /> Jurgens stated it might be beneficial to have the adjoining property owner present. <br /> Gundlach stated if Staff's recommendation number five is required,that would impact the proposal. <br /> Gundlach inquired whether the Planning Commission would require recommendation number five. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the neighbor's mortgage company suggested a land swap and avoiding the lot lines <br /> becoming convoluted. Schoenzeit stated he is giving up part of his shoreline in order to construct this <br /> residence,which is considered more valuable. <br /> Gundlach stated Staff's recommendation is equal lot area and lot width. <br /> Rahn inquired what side yard setback variance would be required if a lot line rearrangement were not <br /> given. Rahn inquired whether it would be possible to locate the garage five feet from the property line. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the garage would be on the property line. Schoenzeit indicated they would like to do <br /> the project in stages. <br /> Fritzler inquired whether this would turn in a rebuild and how long the project is anticipated to take. <br /> Schoenzeit stated they are reusing the majority of the existing structure and keeping the existing footprint. <br /> Fritzler inquired whether the sidewalls and ceilings are staying in the same place. <br /> Schoenzeit indicated they are adding a level on top but that everything else would remain the same. <br /> Fritzler inquired whether the value of the improvements would exceed 50 percent of the value of the <br /> residence. <br /> Schoenzeit stated they have included a sheet that illustrates the costs of the project,noting that the <br /> anticipated costs of the project are less than 50 percent of the value of the residence. Schoenzeit pointed <br /> out one of the garages is not useable given the location of a fence constructed by the neighbor and that <br /> they would like to remove that garage and driveway. <br /> Bremer commented she does have a concern regarding the neighbor and the lot line rearrangement and <br /> that it may be necessary for the neighbor to appear before the Planning Commission. Bremer inquired <br /> what the process would be concerning the lot line rearrangement. <br /> PAGE 29 <br />