Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, July 21, 2014 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />Page 19 of 30  <br />  <br />Thiesse asked what the Planning Commission is being asked to do tonight. <br /> <br />Leskinen stated her understanding is that the Planning Commission has been asked to look at the <br />application as if the Special Lot Combination did not exist. Leskinen stated the question is if this lot was <br />independent of that agreement, would the Planning Commission grant these variances. Leskinen stated in <br />her view the Planning Commission is not in a position to make a formal motion since the Special Lot <br />Combination Agreement does exist. <br /> <br />McGrann stated to his understanding the lawsuit over the Special Lot Combination Agreement will not <br />impact the lot to the north. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the lot to the north has a separate agreement and whatever happens with the current lawsuit <br />does not change the fact that they have a Special Lot Combination Agreement unless they decide to <br />separate their two lots and go through a subdivision. <br /> <br />McGrann stated he finds it very hard to believe that this lot is buildable especially in light of the average <br />lakeshore setback. McGrann stated the Planning Commission can table it if the City Attorney and Staff <br />would like to look at other legal questions, but at the end of the day, McGrann indicated he will find it <br />difficult to approve the average lakeshore setback variance. <br /> <br />Landgraver stated the question is whether the Planning Commission would contemplate a variance to the <br />average lakeshore setback and it appears there are a lot of nos in addition to the 2-1/2 story minimum. <br /> <br />Lemke stated he is not as concerned with the average lakeshore setback as the other Commissioners are <br />since that house is abnormally far back from the water compared to other homes in the area. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit stated the property owners purchased the property with that setback. <br /> <br />Thiesse stated if the applicants had chosen to construct a rambler style house, he likely would look at the <br />average lakeshore setback variance a little differently. <br /> <br />Thiesse moved, Schoenzeit seconded, to table Application No. 14-3675, Ryan and Stacy Alness, 1169 <br />North Arm Drive. <br /> <br />Landgraver asked if there is a consensus to deny the variances. Landgraver stated he does not understand <br />what tabling the application will accomplish other than perhaps allowing any additional factors that arise <br />as part of this matter to be vetted by people in a different pay scale and then brought back once those are <br />hashed out. <br /> <br />Thiesse stated based on what he has heard tonight, there may be some different extenuating circumstances <br />that perhaps should be looked at. <br /> <br />Schwingler stated there are other reasons to deny the variances outside of the Special Lot Combination <br />Agreement. <br /> <br />Morgan Cavanaugh stated he would prefer a denial. <br /> <br />Thiesse stated the Planning Commission does not have enough information to deny the application. <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 08/18/2014 <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes <br />[Page 19 of 30]