Laserfiche WebLink
wetland. GafTron indicated <br />etland delineations and <br />the moratorium. <br />meet the 26-foot buffer, <br />nd why they are drafted <br />re is an outlot located in <br />Carlson stated the outlot is <br />irlson stated if the entire <br />I not be required, and that <br />istructing two separate <br />ally pleasing as what is <br />ileasing structure that <br />roperty owner, and also <br />tss the issue with the <br />lis property and that no <br />moratorium is in effect. <br />i adopt stricter regulations <br />mount of square footage of <br />tng that meets the 26-foot <br />le 26-foot setback is located <br />MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, June 13,2005 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />Gafifon inquired whether the driveway could be relocated slightly. <br />Carlson stated the property owners would prefer not to relocate the driveway but rather reduce the amount <br />of square footage of the lower level. <br />Murphy inquired whether all variances are predicated on a hardship. <br />Barrett indicated they are. <br />Gaf&on stated the variance language in part reads as follows: “Before granting a variance, the council <br />shall hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this chapter in instances where their strict <br />enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual properly <br />under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in <br />keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter.” Gaffron stated a hardship needs to be demonstrated <br />wiirf a showing that they are keeping with the spirit of the code. Gaf&on indicated a number of variances <br />have been granted throu^out the city and that the type and degree of hardship varies from application to <br />application. <br />Murphy stated one solution is to construct two structures above ground, which may not be the best <br />solution. <br />White commented that the proposed plan looks aesthetically pleasing and makes sense for this lot. <br />McMillan inquired whether the City has other two-story accessory stmetures where the below grade level <br />has different footprints. <br />Gaffron inHimt»)H this type of design is unusual for the City and tliat Staff has not determined how much <br />fill dqith is necessary for an area not to be determined as hardcover. <br />White stated he prefers this proposal rather than two separate buildings. <br />McMillan stated the issue then becomes what the square footage should be of the one structure. <br />Carlson slated the configuration of the lot is a hardship and that the design meets the spirit and intent of <br />the ordinance. <br />PAGE 9