05/21/2012 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,May 21,2012 6:30 o'clock p.m. Mattick indicated under current code that would not be allowed. Leskinen noted in that situation they would likely have to use the public landing to launch their boat. Schoenzeit stated perhaps the recommendation should be that the Planning Commission feels that Items 2 and 3 should be reviewed by the City Council. Landgraver stated in his view Item No. 1 should be eliminated,but that he does not have an opinion on the 1,000 feet. Landgraver stated in his view Item No. 3 is reasonable. Schoenzeit stated it appears that Item No. 3 is acceptable and that perhaps the language in Item No.2 could be tweaked as it relates to the 1,000 feet. Mattick noted that Item No. 2 is not specific to relatives or friends and that it does not distinguish between property owner and renter. Landgraver commented he is fine with Items 2 and 3. Leskinen indicated she is fine with Item No. 3 but that she is not comfortable with Items 1 or 2. Schwingler stated he is in agreement with Commissioner Leskinen and that Item No. 2 will be difficult to enforce. Schoenzeit noted Item No. 2 is also dependent upon complaints being received. Leskinen moved,Schwingler seconded,Application#11-3503,City of Orono,Zoning Code Text Amendment-Lakeshore Residential Zoning Districts: Dock Rental,to accept the code as written in Section 1(6),with Item No.3 being allowed as an exception. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. 3. #12-3547 JOHN AND PHOEBE STAVIG,790 BROWN ROAD NORTFI,VARIANCES, 7:35 P.M.—8:16 P.M. John and Phoebe Stavig,Applicants,were present. Gaffron noted this item was tabled at the March Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant time to provide additional information. The applicant is requesting bluff setback,average lakeshore setback, and a rear/street setback variance in order to construct a home on an undeveloped property. A variance to build within the bluff impact zone is also requested. The applicant has provided an engineering report from Carl Anderson Engineering that suggests the slope stability is adequate for construction of a residence at the applicant's proposed location and that the potential for erosion is mitigated by existing vegetation. In reviewing that report, Staff would note that the comment on Page 4 of the report that"the slope of the hill immediately below the top of the bluff line near the location of the proposed structure is significantly less than the 30 percent slope threshold marginally found in areas near the wetland that cause this to be defined as a bluff'does not appear to be Page 6