01-10-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITV COUNCIL MEETING Monday, December 13,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. not meeting the optimum shape should be allowed excess hardcover, which translates to an automatic variance level for almost all existing lots. GalTron indicated Item 3A illustrates the footprints that were allowed in the past six years for various properties given their lot area and the amount of the building pad located within the 75’- 250 ’ area and the approved hardcover. Gaffron stated based on Exhibits 313 and 3C, in his opinion the Switz application is an anomaly and is not consistent with the building footprints typically granted by the City. Gaffron indicated he disagrees with the concept that the peninsula found on the Vogstrom lot should be a factor in detennining the amount of hardcover that should be allowed on this lot. Gaffron indicated the Switz lot is located on a much busier road than the Vogstrom property and that hardships two and four do not apply to the Vogstrom property. G iffron stated approval of hardcover at 34.5 percent would not be consistent with past approvals by the Council. Gaffron pointed out the hardcover reductions being proposed by the applicant are primarily being reduced within the city right-of-way, which is where the majority of the existing driveway is located. Gaffron noted 270 square feet of hardcover is located within the right-of-way and not on the property. Gaffron staled Exhibit 3 A provides information for the last six years for lot area, existing and approved 75’-250 ’ /ones, and lot coverage. Gaffron staled properties that arc slightly bigger have received a slightly bigger footprint but not as much hardcover. Gaffron stated an average is 30 percent and that 1500 square feet in his opinion is appropriate for this lot. Sansevere inquired whether the City is being consistent with the 1,500 square feet requirement. Gaffron staled the applicant feels two applications were treated dilTerently in the past year that were not consistent with the City ’s past practice. Gaffron stated the question is whether lho.se should be looked at as a precedent or whether they should be considered anomalies. i