Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 12, 2020 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 9 of 24 <br /> <br />they can show precedent that this has been approved with not only existing but also new <br />remodels. He stated the reason for the improvement is for his family: when they built the home <br />they had two children and now have three; they also take care of his wife’s father who is a <br />disabled Vietnam Veteran and when he comes to the Cities to receive treatment, he is unable to <br />get to the guestroom on the upper floors. The bedroom they are building will allow for wider <br />doors, have a new bathroom for his father-in-law and it is important to the family to meet those <br />requirements. Mr. Briggs understands variances are tough but in this case he feels it is consistent <br />with the neighborhood and that they have done a lot to solve the questions and concerns the <br />Council has had. In closing, he stated the entire neighborhood supports them, noting three letters <br />of recommendation including the direct neighbor who would be most impacted by this. He said <br />it is truly a practical difficulty for the family not to have his father-in-law stay with them. <br /> <br />Mayor Walsh appreciates all the neighbors input, but like the previous application, there is no <br />practical difficulty; it is a new property that was built that met everything and the rest of the <br />houses are grandfathered in. He noted not having Mr. Brigg’s father-in-law stay with them is not <br />a practical difficulty for building a property and it gets back to the rule again. The homeowner <br />may perceive it as arbitrary and capricious but it is a real rule and unless there is a real practical <br />difficulty there aren’t many places to go with this. <br /> <br />Michael Miller, 1987 Fagerness Point Road, the adjacent homeowner noted he has been there 22 <br />years and in looking at the corner of where Mr. Miller’s existing house and garage are, he is <br />about 4 feet from the road, but someone had foresight early on and he owns t he road now. The <br />house that was there before Mr. Briggs tore it down to build new had the garage exactly even <br />with Mr. Miller’s – 4 feet from the road. He noted he is one of the grandfathered properties, but <br />it seems that it serves no purpose and will not affect anything regarding Mr. Miller or his home, <br />or the immediate neighbor on the other side, who has also said it’s going to be a great addition to <br />the community. <br /> <br />Mayor Walsh appreciates the comments but noted that is not the issue. He asked, does the <br />Council just get rid of the setback rule. <br /> <br />Mr. Miller understands that and understands the rule but noted this seems to be an extraordinarily <br />different neighborhood and there is another additional garage about 6 feet back further down. <br /> <br />Crosby asked if there have been any rebuilds in the last 10 years which the Council has allowed. <br /> <br />Ms. Oakden replied there has been a lot of reconstruction of existing structures where the <br />Council has granted variances in s mall and encroached ways, and noted 1973 Fagerness which <br />was referenced in the design was an existing condition of an attached garage where it was moved <br />farther back from the road by 4 feet but were allowed to go wider by 6 inches to accommodate a <br />new foot print of a garage. <br /> <br />Mr. Briggs stated they should take it farther to find out if any of those variances have been <br />granted. He said there is a garage being built right now on Casco that is closer to the road.