Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,February 21,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> stated in his view there was benefit to the lakeshore property owners being able to do something without a <br /> variance but that Staff would have to research it more to quantify it. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the other part that is not being discussed in either Option A or B is whether they should <br /> eliminate the deck from the structural calculation. Schoenzeit stated at 20 percent,the needle will be <br /> moved quite a bit. <br /> Barnhart stated modifying the structural coverage regulation gives the City the opportunity to hold firm <br /> on other regulations, such as setbacks and hardcover issues. Barnhart stated the City does not need to <br /> grant variances to setbacks provided the setbacks are the correct ones for that lot. Barnhart stated out of <br /> the 41 variances granted last year, 19 dealt with lot area and width and 19 dealt with setbacks,which tells <br /> him that the setbacks might not be appropriate. Barnhart stated the process perhaps should not be easy, <br /> but more than half of the people should not have to go through the variance process to make <br /> reinvestments in their home, which is what the Council is looking at. <br /> Thiesse stated to his knowledge most of the variances occur on the lakeshore lots and that a lot of the <br /> variances are where people are attempting to maximize their lot. <br /> Barnhart stated the variances that typically are not approved are expansions into the 75-foot setback or <br /> hardcover in excess of the limits. <br /> Thiesse stated his fear is that the City is jumping pretty quickly into this and that he wants the City to <br /> have something in place that will work. Thiesse stated he would like to ensure that this has worked ten <br /> years from now. <br /> Lemke commented it would be nice if the City could come up with some numbers and stick with them. <br /> Landgraver stated it is not just about the applicant but the community at large that has concerns about the <br /> size of the house. Landgraver stated he does not want to foolishly open the gates to allowing a third <br /> larger house and that there needs to be a balance throughout the community. <br /> Thiesse pointed out there is a fine line of increasing the value of the property by increasing the size of the <br /> house. <br /> Schoenzeit noted the direction from the Council was incorporated into Option A and that this is an <br /> opportunity for the Planning Commission to make a suggestion that there is something in between Option <br /> A and where the City is currently. Schoenzeit stated the Council should be told that the Planning <br /> Commission has thought about it and has urged some caution. <br /> Schoenzeit stated if this ordinance adjustment does not have the desired effect of fewer variances, the <br /> City needs to understand why that is. Schoenzeit noted the Planning Commission does not get to decide <br /> what the final number is but they can make recommendations. Schoenzeit stated eliminating the decks <br /> from the calculation might cover it rather than completely getting rid of the 15 percent limit. <br /> Landgraver noted the City will also be doing a Comprehensive Plan review and that something of this <br /> magnitude might be best considered as part of that overall discussion. <br /> Schoenzeit stated removing the decks from the calculation could be a start. <br /> Page 27 of 32 <br />