Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 21,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> houses will be here 100 years from now or even 20 years from now and at some point the houses will be <br /> replaced. Dampier stated what won't be replaced is that sightline,and if a house is set at the 75-foot line <br /> and everybody else on Ivy Place is at 120 and 130 feet from the shoreline,that precludes him from using <br /> his property to the same degree that is being granted to the Lupients. <br /> Barnhart stated he does not know how the rules were applied when Mr. Dampier got his building permit <br /> but that he is basing the average lakeshore setback on the current regulations. <br /> Dampier stated he was forced to give up a significant portion of his house because of that 130-foot <br /> setback. Dampier stated his neighbors were also told that as well as the two new houses on Ivy Place. In <br /> all of those situations the City ignored the pre-existing nonconforming structure, but yet the City is using <br /> the pre-existing nonconforming structure as the basis for creating the 75-foot setback in this case, and it is <br /> not right. <br /> Curtis noted the interpretation and the actual language in the average lakeshore code have changed and is <br /> not written the way it was when Mr. Dampier was working on his home. <br /> Dampier asked if he can move closer to the lake. <br /> Curtis stated if the homes on either side of him are more lakeward and there is still room within the 75- <br /> foot setback, he can, but that hardcover and structural coverage would also come into play. <br /> Landgraver stated the rules were probably changed because of that situation. <br /> Thiesse stated if he has not already closed the public hearing,he will do so now. <br /> The public hearing was reclosed at 8:20 p.m. <br /> Landgraver asked if snow just gets pushed down Ivy Place into the lake. Landgraver stated in his view <br /> this is an opportunity to maybe put in a little more protection for the lake. <br /> Thiesse commented he is afraid protections of the lake in connection with snow removal will create other <br /> problems elsewhere and that there is very little room to turn around as it is without snow being piled in <br /> that area. <br /> Barnhart stated the Planning Commission can either forward the application to the City Council or table <br /> the application to give the applicant time to submit the requested information. Barnhart noted the <br /> Planning Commission is not recommending approval of any variances or a conditional use permit at this <br /> time and that those items were highlighted merely to identify future actions that will be required as part of <br /> construction of the property. Barnhart stated a separate public hearing will be held for those items. <br /> Leskinen asked if the variances and conditional use permit would be discussed as part of final plat. <br /> Barnhart indicated it would. <br /> It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the condition of the road be verified both before <br /> and after construction. <br /> Thiesse asked whether the fill would be brought in by barge. <br /> Page 17 of 25 <br />