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 12 of 16 <br /> <br />and there will be a struggle to take the pavement out. That area allows some parking and removal of it <br />will be an issue. There are dock renters at this property and the next-door property and that is where the <br />cars park when there is overflow. It also helps create a nice little buffer. In addition, the neighboring <br />Anderson reiterated that someone can design the house to meet the 20 percent and meet the setbacks, and <br />that it was his understanding the 20 percent was a hard and fast number. <br /> <br />Printup commented what is being proposed is too much for the lot and that it has not been that long ago <br />that the structural coverage was raised to 20 percent from 15 percent. <br /> <br />Walsh noted Staff recommended the applicants comply with the 20 percent. <br /> <br />Printup concurred it is a hard and fast number and they can redesign it. <br /> <br />Quinlivan noted the Planning Commission thought the road was a practical difficulty, and if you take that <br />out of the square footage, it really limits what can be built. Quinlivan asked whether the road could be <br />considered a practical difficulty. Right now with the road it is 14,459 square feet and 11,000 square feet <br />without it. <br /> <br />Walsh pointed out the City typically removes the square footage out of the calculation, and if that was <br />included, they would be able to meet that. <br /> <br />Printup encouraged the applicants meet the structural and hardcover rules as much as possible. <br /> <br />Walsh asked if the road was included as part of the lot for the other lots in the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Curtis stated either the road is platted and is not included, or the road area is removed from the <br />calculation. There have not been a lot of structural coverage variances granted because a number of the <br />lots are 10,000 feet. The other new homes in the neighborhood have complied with the 20 percent. <br /> <br />Quinlivan noted this is the shallowest property in the area, and where the road widens at the front of the <br />house, the largest amount of road is on this property. In his view that is a practical difficulty and it would <br />help fit the 20 percent overall lot coverage. <br /> <br />Walsh commented he can see how it could be a practical difficulty and that the question becomes what <br />mitigating factors there are. Even if all of that is factored in, they are still over. <br /> <br />Quinlivan indicated it is 23.5 percent without the road and in their view they can reduce that. <br /> <br />Printup noted the City does not count the pervious pavers and the cisterns. <br /> <br />Quinlivan pointed out they will absorb all of the watershed for a significant cost and that in his view that <br />is a pretty good trade-off. Removing the road would help. <br /> <br />Walsh noted it is a choice to have a side-loading garage and that it creates a lot of hardcover. The <br />proposed structural coverage and hardcover are the two things that jump out. <br /> <br />Crosby commented it is too much. <br />