Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,June 18,2012 ' <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Leskinen noted if you bring the house back further from the average lakeshore setback,there would be a <br /> greater impact to the lakeviews and possibly an encroachment into the wetlands. <br /> Gaffron indicated given the design of the house, it would encroach into the wetland and the setback <br /> buffer. <br /> Landgraver noted if the Planning Commission tabled the application and the applicant redesigned his <br /> plans to fit within the building envelope,they would not need to come back before the Planning <br /> Commission. <br /> Gaffron stated if the house is redesigned to fit within the building envelope,an argument could be made <br /> that they meet the statute and lot area and width variances would not be needed. <br /> Leskinen asked what would be preferable in terms of the average lakeshore setback. Leskinen noted the <br /> further you push the house back,the greater the impact it would have on the woods and the wetlands. <br /> Thiesse asked if there is a number that is reasonable to the neighbor to the west that they could push the <br /> house back. <br /> Klinger stated she would like the setbacks met and that her concern is with the overall footprint. Klinger <br /> asked if there is any possibility that the house could be scaled down to fit within that building envelope. <br /> • Klinger asked if a longer home could be built to lessen the impact on the views. <br /> Walsh noted if the applicants keep the house within the building envelope,they would not need to come <br /> back to the Planning Commission for approval. Walsh stated in his view it is the sight line that is the � <br /> most important for the Klinger property. <br /> Klinger indicated her major concern is with her sight lines and that in her view her other concerns with <br /> the water and noise could be addressed. <br /> Levang asked how Mr. Coward would feel if the house was pushed further back. <br /> Coward indicated this is the second time they have had an issue with a house being proposed on Shoreline <br /> Drive. The first situation was at 1860 Shoreline Drive where they originally proposed a house that was <br /> 19,000 square feet. The size of that house has now been reduced down to 12,000 square feet. <br /> Coward stated he assumed from the beginning it was a buildable lot and that it comes down to what can <br /> be built. Coward stated no matter how you look at it, it is a big house that easily out-scales the majority <br /> of the homes in the neighborhood. As the house is proposed,all along the property line is driveway. The <br /> only way to mitigate that view is to plant trees on the neighboring properties. In addition,the vegetation <br /> will be removed during the construction process. Coward stated they will have to look at a long driveway <br /> and building. <br /> Walsh asked whether Mr. Coward can live with the house if the structure is pushed further back. <br /> Coward stated ideally the Doughertys would have purchased the land, but from his point of view,the <br /> house is better off being forward. Coward stated in his view the six-car garage could be made smaller, <br /> which would help. <br /> Page <br /> 17 <br />