Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 14, 2019 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 10 of 16 <br /> <br />-49 percent total site hardcover where 25 percent is allowed; <br />-30 percent building/structural coverage where 20 percent is the maximum allowed; <br />- Rear yard setback; <br />-Front (street) setback; and <br />-Side yard setback. <br /> <br />An interim use permit for export of approximately 1,120 cubic yards of material to be hauled from the <br />property within 75-foot setback and off site is also being requested. <br /> <br />At the September Planning Commission meeting, following a public hearing and discussion, they voted <br />4-2 on a motion to deny the requested variances. There was considerable discussion regarding the <br />proposed structural coverage and the adjusted lot area used to calculate structural coverage between the <br />applicant and the Planning Commission. In situations like this one where the traveled roadway does not <br />exist in a dedicated easement, the actual paved width is removed from the lot area for calculation <br />purposes. The total lot area of this property is 14,459 square feet; however, the adjusted area is <br />determined to be 11,100 square feet. <br /> <br />Staff does find practical difficulties inherent to the size and shape of the property in addition to the <br />location of the roadway and lake to justify some level of variances for redevelopment. However, the <br />applicant is proposing redevelopment on this property at a scale which is unsupported by practical <br />difficulties and is far beyond what is reasonable for the property and neighborhood to support. <br /> <br />Staff recognizes that this lot requires certain variances to support development and redevelopment. Staff <br />does not support the structural coverage or hardcover variances because it appears the requests are borne <br />out of convenience rather than hardship. Staff recommends the structural coverage be reduced to 20 <br />percent. <br /> <br />Staff recommends denial of the application as proposed. <br /> <br />John Quinlivan, Gordon James Construction, noted there are currently 28 properties on Crystal Bay Road, <br />with 24 considered lakeshore. Of the 24 properties with lakeshore, this property is the widest property at <br />150 feet. There are approximately 11 lots that are 50 feet or less width, four lots have 60 feet or less in <br />width, five have 90 feet or less in width, and three lots are over 100 feet in width. This property is the <br />widest of those properties but is also the second shallowest property, which presents a number of <br />challenges and practical difficulties. A practical difficulty has to be a reasonable manner not created by <br />the owner and fits the character of the neighborhood. <br /> <br />A number of the lots to the west have front-load garages due to the width of the lot. There are five lots <br />that are wider that have side-loading garages. Several properties to the east have variances for a garage <br />tucked in the back. A side-loading garage was designed for several different reasons. Number one, it <br />offers a better appearance. Number two, Crystal Bay Road is narrow, and it was felt it would be better <br />not to back out into the street. The setbacks are greater than three times what was required. There is also <br />very limited parking on Crystal Bay Road and the side-loading garage would allow for guest parking. <br /> <br />As it relates to hardcover, they are proposing to capture nearly 100 percent of the runoff through cisterns <br />that would capture as much water as possible. The driveway and other exterior hardcover will use <br />pervious pavers and the gutters will direct water to the buried cisterns. The homeowners are very