Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,October 18,2004 <br /> - 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#04-3054 Jon and Gail Blackstone,Continued) <br /> and the pool eliminates access from the back of the lot to the front of the lot. Blackstone stated they <br /> have positioned the new residence further back on the lot to avoid removing fill and disturbing <br /> existing trees and to improve the ability of the builder to make revisions to minimize runoff. <br /> Blackstone stated because of the width of the lot and the position of the house and pool,the access <br /> from the back of the lot to the front of the lot has been eliminated, which in his view constitutes a <br /> hardship. <br /> Tim Lembke,4445 Forest Lake Landing, stated he does not have a problem with the variances but he <br /> would like the runoff in this area addressed. Lembke requested the Planning Commission address the <br /> issues with runoff in this neighborhood,noting at times he has a river running through his yard and <br /> that he has suffered property damage as a result. Lembke commented in his opinion there will be <br /> some issues with erosion during construction that also need to be addressed. <br /> Maggie Erikson,4455 Forest Lake Landing, stated every year they experience sand and silt and mud <br /> runoff in their driveway and that the hardcover being proposed on the lot at 4475 will only increase <br /> that runoff. Erikson noted their property also sits lower than this lot,and with the proposed house <br /> being located further back on the property,that would mean any runoff that is not managed from that <br /> house would head to her house. Erikson indicated it is her understanding the applicants do have plans <br /> to deal with that. <br /> Blackstone stated he is unsure whether it is possible to relocate a shed that size and again noted that it <br /> would not be accessible if the structure were located behind the new residence. <br /> Fritzler noted the survey depicts the shed being located 8 feet from the property line in one corner and <br /> 8.6 feet in the other. Fritzler stated since the ordinance does not allow accessory structures to be <br /> located closer to the street or front lot line than the proposed house,he would not be in favor of the <br /> variance and would follow Staff's recommendation for approval of the lot width variance. Fritzler <br /> recommended the shed be relocated. <br /> Bremer indicated she is in agreement with Staff's recommendations. Bremer encouraged the applicant <br /> to see if the shed could be relocated. <br /> Jurgens stated he also is in agreement with Staff's recommendations. Jurgens inquired whether <br /> setback variances would also be required if the shed were allowed to remain in its present location. <br /> Gundlach indicated setback variances would be required. <br /> Jurgens stated in his view the shed could be moved. <br /> Rahn noted this lot is long and narrow and slopes sideways somewhat. Rahn noted the residence is <br /> being proposed for the flattest most portion of the lot, which is way to the rear of the property. Rahn <br /> inquired whether there is a conforming location for the shed behind the proposed residence. <br /> PAGE 15 <br />