My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-10-2019 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2019
>
06-10-2019 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/2/2019 10:45:48 AM
Creation date
6/25/2019 11:30:31 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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 CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,June 10,2019 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Johnsrud stated he is hoping his application is not delayed and that he will either build another structure <br /> or add on to the existing one. Adding on to the existing building financially made more sense since only <br /> three posts are required,they do not have to do any augmenting to the driveway or remove any trees. It <br /> also made more sense for the neighbors. The house to the east will not be able to see it from their house <br /> or from the road. <br /> Walsh noted the City's Code does not allow them to do that without a practical difficulty, which is what <br /> the City Council has to follow. <br /> Johnsrud stated there was nothing he saw that defined what a practical difficulty is and that it seems <br /> arbitrary. <br /> Crosby stated in his view the practical difficulty is the access and that he would be in favor of moving it <br /> forward and then addressing the code. <br /> Johnson stated no trees would also need to be removed. <br /> Seals stated a practical difficulty is something that prevents you from living on the property. <br /> Crosby stated enjoyment of your property is also included. <br /> Mattick stated some discretion is allowed but a financial consideration is not one of them. When it comes <br /> to a practical difficulty,the question usually is, is there something about this property that makes it <br /> unique. The City Council knows he can construct a structure that meets the requirements of the Code. <br /> The Code contemplates, if due to the dynamics of the lot, he is not able to construct,that would be <br /> considered a practical difficulty. The removal of trees here or there is not that much of a practical <br /> difficulty, but if there are steep slopes,that may be an additional practical difficulty. A practical difficulty <br /> is not simply because it makes sense. <br /> Walsh commented it becomes a slippery slope, and that they had one application on Crystal Bay Road <br /> where having a washer and dryer on the bottom floor was an issue, but it did not prevent them from <br /> enjoying their property. If the applicant does not want to wait for the City to review the Code and wants <br /> to build another structure, he can do that,but if he waits, he can build it exactly where he wants to. <br /> Crosby stated in his view the accessibility is the issue. <br /> Johnson asked if Staff told the applicant they would not support the proposal and why he brought it <br /> forward. <br /> Johnsrud stated he decided to go through the channels and come before the City Council. The Planning <br /> Commission vote was 4-3 and there was actually quite a long discussion about the whole process at the <br /> Planning Commission. One of the comments was,this makes no sense,which is similar to the <br /> conversation the Council has already had. <br /> Johnson stated he would like to approve it but that he does see where the City has its own minutia that <br /> prevents them from using logic sometimes. <br /> Walsh stated the Council should give direction to Staff on how the code should be changed. <br /> Page 17 of 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.