My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/18/2012 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
06/18/2012 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/20/2012 3:29:15 PM
Creation date
8/20/2012 3:29:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,June 18,2012 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> The defined average lakeshore setback line angles across the applicant's lot near its midpoint,rendering <br /> the front half of the lot unbuildable unless a variance is granted. The back half of the lot is constrained by <br /> a wetland classified in the Preserve category,requiring a 50-foot buffer and a 20-foot buffer setback. <br /> This combination,plus the required 30-foot side setbacks,yields a trapezoidal building envelope <br /> approximately 90 feet wide and averaging 100 feet deep. The proposed house would encroach <br /> approximately 58 feet past the average setback line measured perpendicular to that line. <br /> The request for an average setback variance is in part based on preservation of a wooded area within the <br /> back half of the property. The front of the main portion of the house will be located in an open area <br /> abutting the woods. The L-shape of the proposed house,plus the proposed pool,will still substantially <br /> impact the woods. Placing the proposed house to meet the average setback would have a much greater <br /> impact on the woods. Absent the average setback issue,the best house location to preserve the wooded <br /> area would be to place it even more lakeward of the defined average setback line than proposed. <br /> The applicant also notes that setting the house further back will increase the costs of connecting to sewer <br /> as well as require additional driveway. These factors are inherent to the lot regardless of the size/shape of <br /> any house located to meet the average setback. <br /> The Planning Commission should consider whether the views of the lake enjoyed by neighboring <br /> property owners will be impacted by the proposed residence.The applicant notes that the lake views from <br /> 1900 Shoreline will not be impacted by the proposed structures. Whether views of the lake enjoyed by <br /> 1920 Shoreline are impacted is a more difficult question. The applicant has provided a number of photos <br /> of the property from various perspectives. One perspective that is not shown is from the windows at 1920 <br /> during winter leaf-off conditions. The applicant also notes that existing pine trees on the applicant's <br /> property already block 1920's views year-round. The applicant has discussed the proposed house location <br /> with the neighboring property owners but Staff has not had direct communications from the most affected <br /> owner at 1920 Shoreline. A letter opposing the variance has been submitted from the owner at 1900 <br /> Shoreline. <br /> It should be noted that the home on the property at 1950 Heritage Drive sits to the rear of the house at <br /> 1900 Shoreline Drive but could technically also be considered as a"residence building on the <br /> immediately adjacent lakeshore lot," because 1950 Heritage also extends to the shoreline just east of 1900 <br /> Shoreline. Whether the owner of 1950 Heritage has any concerns is unknown. <br /> The Planning Commission should consider the following factors: <br /> 1. Are there existing views of the lake from the neighboring residence structure at 1920 Shoreline <br /> Drive? If so,what impacts does the applicants'proposed house location have on those existing <br /> views? <br /> 2. Are there existing views of the lake from the neighboring residence that would be"seasonal only" <br /> due to the types of vegetation present? Over which property are those views, 1910 or 1920? If <br /> that vegetation was to be removed or changed for whatever reason,how would such removal or <br /> change impact those views? The City does not regulate the tree removal or preservation except <br /> within the 0-75 foot setback zone,which in this case is mostly encumbered by the county road <br /> and its right-of-way. The woods to the rear of the property enjoys no special protection other <br /> than the 50-foot buffer abutting the wetland is required to be maintained as-is. <br /> Page <br /> 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.