Laserfiche WebLink
, „ <br /> � ��� �. - <br /> MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING " <br /> Monday,June 21,2010 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> : (#10-3475 JUDSON DAYTON,825 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,CONTINUED) <br /> Curtis indicated it does not appear those properties will be impacted and that those neighbors were <br /> ' notified of tonight's hearing. <br /> Winston noted this concept has been before the Planning Commission on other occasions and has been <br /> preliminarily approved but was not pursued given the poor market conditions. <br /> Winston stated the affected neighbors are not in attendance tonight and that they are requesting this <br /> evening that the variance be applied to both Lot 1 and Lot 2. The concern was that a future new house on <br /> Lot 2 was arbitrarily set 200 or 300 feet back from the lake and that a potential owrier would not <br /> necessarily construct the house there if it should ever be reconstructed. These are large lots and would be <br /> improved with amenities and landscaping. Winston stated in their view the properties would be able to be <br /> marketed better with the variances. � <br /> � Winston pointed out that the house most comparable with this one is the residence located beyond the <br /> Delaney property and that this proposal is consistent with the location of that particular house. Delaney's <br /> house faces the southwest and not southerly across this lot. Winston stated they do not feel there is any <br /> negative impact to the Delaney house. The other house is located considerably closer to the lake than this <br /> house. <br /> Chair Kang opened the public hearing at 8:20 p.m. <br /> Curtis noted she did receive a phone call this morning from a neighbor regarding the northern driveway <br /> and he was asked whether he had anything specifically to bring to the Planning Commission and he <br /> indicated he did not. <br /> Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 8:21 p.m. <br /> Kang indicated she does not have any problems with the application. <br /> Feuss stated she also does not have any concerns with the application. <br /> Schwingler asked whether the Planning Commission should be concerned about granting variances on <br /> this application without having specific plans for the future homes. <br /> " Curtis indicated Staff feels this is a unique situation and that the elements of the application are such that <br /> Staff would feel comfortable granting approval without seeing a specific plan. <br /> Schoenzeit asked if there are any restrictions that structures cannot be placed closer to the lake than the <br /> 75-foot setback line. <br /> Curtis indicated that could be part of the Planning Commission's recommendation. <br /> � Schoenzeit stated he would like to see sufficient language in the variances restricting structures closer <br /> than 75 feet to the lake. � <br /> Winston stated that would be acceptable. <br /> Page <br /> 17 <br />