Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,October 16,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Thiesse commented it is a lot of wall already and that he would have difficulty with the switch back. <br /> Howry stated there are existing stairs there, but as far as reconfiguring the stairs,there is no way to get a <br /> ramp in there without reconfiguring some of the existing walls. <br /> Schwingler noted they would be adding more hardcover within the 0-75 foot zone. <br /> Landgraver commented he does not recall the City ever approving something like this and that he does <br /> not want to start now. Landgraver stated it appears the Planning Commission is okay with the average <br /> lakeshore setback variance and the average lakeshore setback variance but is against the hardcover <br /> variance. <br /> Schoenzeit stated he sees no compelling reason to add more hardcover in that area. <br /> Landgraver moved, Schoenzeit seconded,to recommend denial of Application No. 17-3970,Paul <br /> Vogstrom on behalf of William and Sue Dunkley,2709 Walters Port Lane, based upon the request <br /> for a hardcover variance in the 0-75 foot zone. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. <br /> Thiesse stated the Planning Commission will next discuss Application No. 17-3971, variances in order to <br /> construct a new home with a pool and construct shoreline retaining walls within the 75-foot lake and <br /> average lakeshore setback. <br /> Thiesse stated he stood along the average setback line and then stood further back along the line and his <br /> view was not changed. Thiesse stated the house will just be further back from the lake. <br /> Leskinen asked whether the scope of the variances changes for the new building if the lot line <br /> rearrangement does not happen. <br /> Curtis indicated it would. Curtis stated if the lot line rearrangement does not happen, it would change <br /> everything being proposed. <br /> Curtis pointed out the current lot line and the proposed lot line. Curtis stated if they were to rebuild on <br /> the Pence Lane property in the same location, it would result in a narrower house as viewed from the lake. <br /> The home that was removed was a one-story rambler and what is being proposed is a two-story. <br /> Currently the lot consists of four acres and they would have ample conforming area to construct a new <br /> home on. Curtis stated the creation of the new lot line creates in part their practical difficulty because it <br /> does not allow them to move the house further back. <br /> Leskinen asked if the Planning Commission should just review this application without considering the <br /> lot line rearrangement. <br /> Curtis stated they should make a recommendation based on what is in front of the Planning Commission <br /> for this application. <br /> Schoenzeit noted the applicants would not get the variances if the lot line rearrangement does not happen. <br /> Page 15 of 32 <br />