My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-16-2014 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2014
>
06-16-2014 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2018 11:40:46 AM
Creation date
4/6/2015 2:08:57 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
199
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, May 19, 2014 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 17 of 31 <br /> <br />Johnson stated when he was approached by the applicant with the plan, his immediate response was that it <br />will be ten feet from the property line, which is the code minimum, and is not showing consideration for <br />the neighbor. Johnson stated there is some potential to put some screening in but that it is not included in <br />the applicant’s plan. <br /> <br />Johnson stated he can appreciate the fact the City would like to come up with a long-term solution and <br />that he would suggest that one of the lots serve as a buffer. Johnson stated he is willing to have that <br />discussion even if it not in his best interests. Johnson noted the applicant said no to his suggestion since it <br />would not give him his expanded parking. <br /> <br />Johnson stated there is a history of this site having numerous issues and there is also a history of people <br />from the City saying that they will not allow expansion of the site and that it should remain residential. <br />Johnson stated if this property is included in the commercial district without stringent controls, it will be <br />necessary for him to be before the City Council all the time. Johnson stated the proposal is not close to <br />meeting the requirements for approval and that the applicant should resolve the outstanding issues before <br />this application proceeds forward to the City Council. Johnson indicated he is attempting to protect the <br />value of his home and that any changes to the site should be done at a world-class level. Johnson <br />reiterated that he does not believe the City is anywhere close to being in a position to approve the <br />application. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit asked when he purchased his house. <br /> <br />Johnson indicated in 2012. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit asked if the docks on Tanager Bay were there when he purchased the property. <br /> <br />Johnson stated they were. Johnson stated the applicant is talking about moving the docks closer to his <br />house and that all the boats going to those docks will come right by his house into the slips. Johnson <br />stated the closer the docks are to his house, the more it will directly impact him. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit asked if there are more than two docks in that area currently. <br />Johnson indicated there are two. <br /> <br />Gaffron displayed an aerial photograph of the area. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit noted there is another dock that belongs to another marina. <br /> <br />Johnson stated his line of sight is not that impacted at the present time but that the relocation of the docks <br />will directly impact their line of sight, not to mention the increase in the number of boats and vehicles. <br /> <br />Michael Gelish, EOF Investments, indicated they are interested in making the property the best for <br />everyone involved. Gelish stated he can identify with what Mr. Johnson said but that he did purchase a <br />home next to a commercial marina that was in operation. Gelish indicated he would love to work with <br />Mr. Johnson to figure out a way to make it work for everybody but that Mr. Johnson will not work with <br />them and that he is basically against doing anything with the site. <br /> <br />Gelish stated the other thing that is important to note is the City has a vested interest in getting the <br />property cleaned up since part of it is zoned residential and part is zoned commercial along with <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 06/16/2014 <br />Aproval of Planning Commission Minutes 05/19/2014 <br />[Page 17 of 31]
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.