06-27-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Moaday, Jaae 13,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. i.' (005>3111 Water Street Homes, Coatioaed) Gaffron stated the applicants are proposing to construct a detached accessory structure for the storage of collector vehicles, with a number of variaiKes being requested. The applicants are proposing the accessory structure be located nearer the front or street lot line than the princinel residence structure and a variance to the allowed footprint area for an oversize accessory structure. The property, not including the separate outlot driveway corridor, is about 2.7 acres, which would allow an accessory structure with a footprint of 1,200 square feet. If the total area of the lot and outlot, including wetland, is used in the calculation, die lot at 4.985 acres would allow a 2,000 square foot footprint. The total buried and above ground fooqrrint of the proposed building as reported by the applicant is 3,310 square feet, with 1,426 square feet being located above ground. Gaffron noted the City ’s code does not address whether the outlot should be included. In addition, the applicants are also requesting a conditional use permit for plumbing in an accessory structure that includes a toilet. Gaffron stated die site is limited due to the topography and the location of a septic site, which is the reason for constructing the structure in the proposed location. Gaffron pointed out there are some wetlands located on this property and that ^ applicants are proposing a 16-foot setback from one wetland. Gaffron noted Orono’s wetland moratorium prohibits alteration of wetlands or lands within 26 feet of the wetland. Gaffron stated one comer of the proposed structure is located within 26 feet of the wedand. Gaffron stated due to the moratorium, the Council is not able to approve any application that affects wedands. Gaffron indicated the Planning Commission reviewed this application and spent some time considering the visual aspect of the building, with the applicant having submitted some revisions to the original plan based on the concerns raised by the Plarming Commission. The applicant is now proposing to locate the structure sli^tly further to the east, which provides a greater separation betwee n the two buildings. Gaffrxm noted the Planning Commission al^ raised some concerns regarding the drainage and the applicant is now proposing some retaining walls and some minor grade changes. Gaffron stated the main issue is the proximity to the wetland and whether this application would be subject to the wetland moratorium. Gaffron indicated if the applicant is able to locate the structure 26-feet from the wetland, they would not be subject to the moratorium. Gaffron stated the Planning Commissitm had some concerns regarding the future use of this structure, with the applicants indicating they are willing to place covenants or other restrictions requested by the Council on the property to limit the future use of the stmeture. Murphy inquired whether there is a hardship to grant the variance. Gaffron stated from StafTs perspective there is not a hardship for the size of the structure but that there are some mitigating factors that reduce the visual and future use concerns. Gaffrtm stated a smaller building could be built which would comply with the codes. Murphy noted the lot is very isolated from the neighboring properties. Murphy inquired whether a conditional use permit would be appropriate for the proposed structure. PAGES