Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 15,2006 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#06-3196 PAT McNAUGHTON/ED HAlVIM,CONTINUED) <br /> Wells stated her drainage and sight lines have been affected because of these changes on this lot and that <br /> over the years there have been loads of gravel that have been periodically dumped on this property. <br /> Wells stated in her view the purpose is to allow for parking in that area,which will also impact her sight <br /> line. Wells stated she would like to see the property restored. <br /> Huntsberg,Willow Drive, stated he has spoken with the County and that there is access to this lot for <br /> the people down near the shore. Huntsberg inquired why Orono allows access to the lake if access to <br /> this property is not allowed. Huntsberg stated it is a buildable lot without the 33 feet strip of land. <br /> Wells stated the house would need to be built further back on the lot. <br /> Rahn closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. <br /> McNaughton stated there is a lot of old stuff that does not pertain to the application tonight and that he <br /> understands and respects the neighbors' views but that they also had the opportunity to purchase this lot. <br /> McNaughton stated his original intent was to build on the lot across the lake,but that given his concerns <br /> regarding the safety of crossing the road,he is pursuing the lot line rearrangement. McNaughton stated <br /> the availability of utilities to this location also changes his plans. <br /> McNaughton noted access is not being added to Orono Lane and that Mr.Hamm has had access to the <br /> road for a number of years. McNaughton stated the combination makes it a safe,buildable lot, and that <br /> the house will help to shelter the neighbors from the noise of the road. <br /> McNaughton pointed out any work done on the property over the years has been done with a permit. <br /> Jurgens commented he does not like the idea of taking a conforming lot and making two nonconforming <br /> lots. Jurgens stated there should be some discussion regarding the average lakeshore setback and the <br /> impact to the neighbors due to the orientation of the house. Jurgens stated there might be a possibility <br /> that the house should be further back. <br /> Rahn stated he does not feel it is necessary to discuss the house at this time since the footprint is visible <br /> and the lot is buildable. Rahn stated without a formal plan in front of him,he would prefer not to <br /> discuss the house. <br /> Rahn stated if that strip of land were not attached to the other lot,he would attach it to the existing <br /> lakeshore lot.Rahn stated if this strip of land were abutting the lot across the street,he would not be in <br /> favor of this. Rahn stated this is not an adjacent property and that the combination would benefit the <br /> � McNaughton property when the time comes to construct a structure on the lot. <br /> Kempf stated there is some di�cult history to contend with,but that he is in favor of the combination. <br /> Kempf noted the proposed house does sit in front of the other houses and that the lakeshore setback is <br /> designed to protect views of the lake. Kempf stated the proposed house would not obstruct the views of <br /> the lake in this situation. <br /> PAGE 17 <br />