Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF rilE <br />ORONO Cn Y COUNCIL MEKi'lNC; <br />Monday, December 13, 2004 <br />7:00 o*cl<Kk p.m. <br />nol meeting the optimum shape should he allowed excess hardct)vei , which iianslalcs to .m <br />automatic variance level Tor almost all existing lots. <br />Galtron indicated Item .1A illustrates the loolprints that were allowed in the jtasl six years lor <br />various pr«»perties given their lot aiea and the amount of the building pad located within the 75 ’- <br />250 ’ area and the approved hardcover. Ciailron staled based t)ii Irxhibils 3H and 3(’, in his <br />opinion the Switz applieation is an anomaly and is nol consistent with llie building footprint. <br />typically granted by the City. GalTron indicated he di.sagiees with the concept that the peninsula <br />found on the Vogsirom lot should be a factor in determining the amount of hardcover Ilia*, should <br />he allowed on this lot. <br />Gal Iron indicated the Switz lot is located t)n a much busier road than the Vogsirom properly and <br />that hardships two and four do nol apply to the Vogs • )m property. Galtron elated approval of <br />hardcover at 34.5 percent would nol be consi.sleni with past approvals by the Couiuvl. <br />Oaffron pointed out :l:e hardcover rcdiicliotis being projiused by the iipplicant are primarily being <br />reduced within the city right-of-way, whicit is where the majority of the exi.sting driveway ;* <br />located. CialTr«)ti n«)led 270 srpiare feel of hardcover is located within the right -of-way and not on <br />the properly. <br />Gaffron .staled |{xhihil 3A provide.'- information for the last six years for lot area, existing and <br />approved 75 ’-250 ’ zones, and lot coverage. Galtron staled properties tliai are sli^.I.’ly bigger have <br />received n slightly biggei footpiinl but nol as much hardcover. (iafiVon sialeil an average is 30 <br />peiceni aiul that I5(X) sipiare feel in his opinion is appropriate for this lot. <br />.Sansevere inquired whether the City is iKiiig consi.slent with the l,5(M) sqn.ire feet KHpiiienieni <br />(ialli ’*. ..lilted the applicant feels two applications were treated tiiflerently in the past year Uiat <br />were nol consistent with the City's past piactice. (i.ilVion slat :.! the «|ue.siion is wfiethei tlui.se <br />■ihoiild be looked at as a precedent or whelher they should be eonsulereil .inomalics. <br />4