Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF,THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COnZNIISSION <br /> Monday,July 17,2006 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#06-3180 William Ulrich,Continued) <br /> the past. Kempf stated even if the house was constructed prior to the implementation of those rules,those <br /> rules,in his opinion, should still apply to environmental lakes. , <br /> Jurgens stated at the time a zoning code is changed,there is some hardship that can occur if there are <br /> pre-existing conditions. Jurgens stated when a significant addition is being proposed,that is a different <br /> . situation and usability of the property should be considered. <br /> Bremer stated she does not have a problem with the average lakeshore setback but that she does have a <br /> concern with the location of the house. Bremer stated the fact that this is an environmental lake and given <br /> the type of vegetation that is involved, Staff should look at this application differently. The visual impact <br /> to the neighbors is very minimal. Bremer indicated she does not have a concern with allowing an <br /> increase in the structure since it would not be out of character with the rest of the neighborhood. � <br /> Bremer questioned whether the addition needs to be as large as proposed and that some addition is <br /> appropriate given the hardship that is created with the 150-foot setback. Bremer stated she would like to <br /> table the application to allow the applicant time to design a smaller structure. <br /> Schmitt pointed out the house is located a distance from the lake and would not impact the neighbors' <br /> view of the lake in any way. � <br /> Kroeger inquired what the neighbors feel about this project. <br /> Schmitt stated the neighbors and the homeowners association have signed off on this project. <br /> Berg inquired whether hardcover or structural coverage is an issue. <br /> • Gaffron stated those are not�an issue in this application. <br /> Bremer noted the change in the City laws happened in 1992 and the house was constxucted prior to that <br /> time. <br /> Gaffron stated it is not up to Staff to determine whether there is a hardship that exists. Gaffron stated <br /> structure meets all the other standards and is consistent with the other structures in the neighborhood. <br /> Bremer stated in 1991 the applicant would have been able to construct this addition. . <br /> Gaffron suggested the Planning Commission consider the impact this addition would have on the lake,the <br /> impact on the views of the lake, and whether additional stormwater protections are necessary. Gaffron <br /> stated there is a higher standard along environmental lakes. <br /> Bremer stated the retaining walls help to address the erosion concerns and water quality. <br /> PAGE 17 <br />