05/16/2006 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 15,2006 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#06-3197 GRANT AND JULIE JOHNSON,CONTINUED) Rahn moved,Jurgens seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3197,Grant and Julie Johnson,2445 Dunwoody Avenue,with the stipulation that the retaining wall be relocated five feet from the adjoining property line and with the level of hardcover as proposed. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. (Recess taken from 9:08 p.m.—9:14 p.m.) 8. #06-3198 GREG AND CINDY HAUGEN,3320 FOX STREET,VARIANCE, 9:14—9:33 P.M. Rick Carlson,Waterstreet Homes,was present on behalf of the Applicants. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance in order to construct an in-ground pool ahead of the average lakeshore setback. The applicants received approval to build a new home on the property in late 2005,prior to the adoption of the City's new wetland regulations. The applicants would now like to install a pool on the lakeside of the proposed home. They have proposed a plan for the wetland buffer area in order to mitigate the affects of the additional hardcover proposal. Staff finds that there are hardships in order to grant the average lakeshore setback variance. The primary intent with the average lakeshore setback requirement is to protect any views of the lake that neighboring properties may have. In the past,variances have been granted to this requirement when it can be demonstrated that views will not be impacted. The uniqueness of this property is that the applicants' home and the neighboring homes are over 250' from the shoreline. The topography and the vegetation likely do not allow a view of the lake over the proposed pool location. Curtis noted the neighbor to the west has submitted a letter of objection to the average lakeshore setback variance and has an existing pool in the lake yard which is much closer to the lake than the applicant's proposed pool. Planning Staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback should the Planning Commission deternune that it does not negatively impact the neighbori.ng property owner's existing views of the lake. Regarding the wetland buffer requirement,prior to review by the City Council,the applicants should submit a revised, detailed plan for the wetland buffer for John Smyth's review and approval. Carlson stated this property is a unique property and is set back far from the lake. Carlson indicated the pool is outside the 75-250' zone. Carlson stated originally there was a different setback line established by a subdivision,and when the house next door was built with a pool,a domino effect was created and the houses on the other lots have been further set back. Carlson stated at the time the subdivision was done,no wetland was delineated on this property. The property was subsequently remapped and a wetland was delineated,with buffers being established. PAGE 24