10-10-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 26,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. n. 1(05-3136 TROY BROnZMAN, I860 SHOREUNE DRIVE, Continued) upfront with all of the neighbors with regard to his plans and, in fact, he had been granted construction easements by his neighbors to build. Broitzman stated that the only comment he recalled receiving from any of the neighbors was to change the proposed surface of the driveway retaining wall to a stone, rather than brick, facade. With regard to screening, Broitzman stated that he intended to plant mature trees on both he and his neighbors’ properties. Sansevere stated that, according to the neighbor’s letters, they do not agree that this design will fit into the character of the neighborhood or the land itself. Broitzman stated that City Code allows him 15% structural coverage on his property, of which he has only proposed about 7.5%. McMillan stated that, though the formula works to his advantage, she felt he was overdeveloping the lot. Furthermore, similar to the County, she stated that she, too, would like to see the driveway access off Heritage Drive as opposed to County Road 15 in an effort to minimize the curb cuts on the county road and would make this part of her recommendation. Broitzman stated that he brought in the County for their opinion for a second driveway off Heritage, not a replacement for the one off County Road 15. He stated that, from what he understood of the codes, he could not be forced to change the existing driveway. Murphy stated that he had spoken to and received a letter from Mr. Nelson, a neighbor, who felt he was misled by the applicant, as were many other neighbors who felt they were told numerous different stories. Murphy stated that he could not support moving this amount of dirt to create or overhaul this piece of land to suit the applicant’s desire for walkouts. Mayor Peterson commented that she was disturbed by the way the applicant had raped the lot of trees and its history and found it difficult to support a lot width variance for something so expansive and out of character for the neighborhood. White pointed out that the purpose of the zoning code is to implement the comp plan. Aesthetics and what is appropriate to fit in with the character of an area makes up a piece of the comp plan. In addition, the comp plan is designed to protect what the city holds dear which is the character and stability of a neighborhood, as noted by the adopted Rural Oasis Study. He indicated that he would not support altering the appearance, in bulk, for something that he felt failed on every count of the Ordinance that he could identify with regard to the compatibility of the neighborhood. McMillan stated that she would only approve a lot width variance if extra side setbacks were implemented to allow for additional drainage and screening. She maintained that the applicant had adequate space to build a decent new home on this lot but not enough extra room to allow him to remove by CUP soil to create walkouts. She could not support land alteration to simply make it convenient for the applicant to implement this proposal. Broitzman stated that he purchased the lot because of its view and character of Orono. PAGE 5 of 10 F ! ■