Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Tuesday,January 17,2012 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Leskinen stated she does not have an issue with the door or the deck and that it is reasonable to have <br /> access to the lake. <br /> Levang stated another issue is that when this originally came before the Planning Commission and the <br /> City Council, due diligence was done at that time and that it is hard to go beyond what was originally <br /> approved. Levang stated she would be hard pressed to approve something beyond what was originally <br /> approved. <br /> Truwit stated there are two fundamental components to the driveway and they consist of practical <br /> difficulty and safety. The issue of the turnaround is one of practicality and making the driveway safe for <br /> someone to back out of the driveway. You currently have to back out into the adjoining property <br /> driveway,which is not a safety issue,but it is a practical issue. Truwit stated it is not unreasonable to be <br /> able to turn around in your driveway. The driveway is long and narrow and will be elevated with a <br /> retaining wall on both sides. If someone attempts to back out of the driveway, it is very likely they will <br /> go over the edge. In order to go out of the driveway facing forward,they will need to back into the <br /> adjoining property's driveway. If the neighbor has visitors or everyone is home,that then becomes more <br /> complicated. <br /> Thiesse asked whether the easement for the neighbor's driveway is on this property. <br /> Truwit indicated it is. <br /> Thiesse stated he is concerned with the practical issues that have been raised. <br /> Truwit stated he understands that it is an extraordinary request,but that they have attempted to limit the <br /> hardcover to what is important to make this property function properly. <br /> Landgraver commented it seems logical to have driveway space that makes the front door accessible. <br /> Landgraver stated the red loop depicted on the drawing makes sense, and asked whether it could be a <br /> different shape. <br /> Truwit commented in his view it would still be di�cult to back up and pointed out that there is a tree in <br /> the center. <br /> Gaffron stated he is in agreement with Staffls recommendations and that the amount of hardcover being <br /> requested is excessive. The City has required turnarounds in other situations but that this is a situation <br /> where there is a much larger backup apron proposed without the loop. Gaffron stated he understands this <br /> is a unique property but that he feels this amount of hardcover is excessive. Gaffron indicated he would <br /> prefer a backup apron situation. Gaffron noted the rest of the 0-75 hardcover is not being mitigated <br /> anywhere and that he would be inclined to not approve the loop. <br /> Levang,Leskinen and Landgraver indicated they are against the loop portion of the driveway. <br /> Owens suggested the Planning Commission break the motion down into pieces and be specific about each <br /> portion of the application. <br /> Schoenzeit moved to recommend approval of Application 312-3540,Charles Truwit and Paula <br /> Picard, 1105 Ferndale Road West,granting of lot area and lot width variances; granting of a side <br /> Page <br /> 24 <br />