My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-12-2016 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2016
>
12-12-2016 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/19/2019 3:43:42 PM
Creation date
4/19/2019 3:42:38 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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 TRUTH -IN -TAXATION MEETING <br />and the <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, December 12, 2016 <br />6.30 o'clock p.m. <br />21. #16-3885 HANS AND SHARON BERGH — 2800 SHADYWOOD ROAD — VARIANCES <br />(continued) <br />Curtis noted Staff felt the variances being requested were not controversial but that a public hearing is <br />required regardless. <br />Hans Bergh, Applicant, stated one of the reasons they are here is because they learned about the extra <br />variance just recently. Bergh indicated they have sold their current house and that their builder is ready to <br />go on the new house. Bergh stated Staff suggested that this might be a way to keep the project on <br />schedule. <br />Barnhart stated Staff has worked with the applicant over the course of the past several months and the <br />applicant has taken great pains to reduce the number of variances. Barnhart stated the grading variance <br />was necessary and the change in height is relatively minor. Barnhart stated ideally the application would <br />go through the Planning Commission process but that it would impact the timing of the project, which is <br />why Staff is supporting the variance requests. <br />Printup stated the application looks fine but that he does not want to give the impression that the Council <br />is not following the normal procedure. <br />Bergh stated they started the plan and then sold their house. Bergh indicated they did make modifications <br />to move the structure further away from the setbacks and attempted to work with Staff as best as they <br />could to achieve a plan that was as compliant as possible. Berge stated this is an unusual situation and <br />unusual circumstances and that they would like to get going on the building. <br />Walsh stated he has the same concerns as Council Member Printup since the City has a normal process <br />that it follows and that it would only delay it 30 days from January 9. Walsh commented he knows that <br />everybody would like to expedite the process if they could but that the Planning Commission serves a <br />valuable function regardless if it appears to be a straight forward application. <br />Barnhart stated the clause in the code is intended to address situations when there is a lag in meetings and <br />that there would still be an opportunity for the public to comment on the application. <br />McMillan asked if it would be reported for January 9. <br />Curtis indicated it would be. Curtis stated the additional posting would be for people who are out of town <br />given the holidays. <br />Walsh asked if the Council does open the public hearing, whether they would be making any resolutions <br />tonight. <br />Curtis indicated the Council would direct Staff to draft a resolution and then reopen the public hearing on <br />January 9th. <br />Walsh commented he is cognizant of the fact that there is only one meeting this month. <br />Page 28 of 33 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.