09/19/2011 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

� MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,September 19,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schwingler moved,Leskinen seconded,to recommend approval of Application#11-3526,3515 Capital Partners,LLC,granting of plat approval for the six lots south of 1545 Maple Place,subject to the City Engineer and Staff s recommendations being resolved prior to the application proceeding to the City Council. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. PLANI�TING COMMISSION COIVIMENTS 5. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON AUGUST 22,211,AND SEPTEMBER 12,2011 Schoenzeit stated at the September 12,2011,meeting,the City Council had a fairly lengthy discussion regarding the Helmer application on Casco Circle. The Planning Commission took the position that the sight line was not changing but the City Council felt that the sight lines were negatively impacted, particularly in light of the neighbor's opposition to the project. The application was tabled to allow them to redesign their project. Thiesse stated the Planning Commission was well aware of the average setback line but that it was on a curve and they were looking at it from a different perspective. Schoenzeit stated in his view the applicant and the neighbor incorrectly used the words sight line to describe a panoramic view when it really was just the view of the lake. Schoenzeit stated in his view the applicant had done a good job locating the structure away from the lake. Curtis�stated in planning their deck,the applicant took into account what the homeowner's current sight line was. They took into account that the neighbor had views out of his window and placed their proposed improvements out of that line of sight and behind the furthest point of their encroachment into the average setback. While the neighbor to the west would see the deck,it did not encroach further into the average lakeshore setback and it did not block any existing view of the lake. The sight line was taken into account in designing the project but they were still ahead of the average lakeshore setback with their improvements. Schoenzeit stated given the fact that the rest of the property was nonconforming and the neighbor was opposed to the proposal,the majority of the City Council felt that it should be denied. Levang stated in her view the issue was the average lakeshore setback. Curtis stated the deck was legally nonconforming and was granted a hardcover variance. Curtis indicated she is not sure when the house was constructed,but if it received variances in order for the house to be located in the spot where it was, the variance approval would make it conforming. The hardcover on the lot was confornung. The applicant was changing from flat,nonstructural hardcover to structural coverage. While code allows Staff in the nonconforming section to approve hardcover, Staff cannot change nonconforming hardcover into a structure. Levang commented there was also an issue with the dormers and the fact that they extended into the averagelakeshore setback. Page 13