09-12-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 22,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. (7. m5-3129 ASCENT INVESTMENTS, INC. ON BEHALF OF DOUGLAS KUNT, CoHtimnetl) Sansevere asked whether Klint’s hardship supported the variance request in staffs mind. He noted that Council’s greatest responsibility is consistency. Gundlach and Gafbron indicated that they felt the home could be built within the setbacks and were not compelled by the ^>plicant’s hardship, since no one knows how the ROW public access may need to be used in the fiituie. White stated that, while he sympathized with the applicant's wishes for his design and desire to clean-up the property, Council was in an awkward position. Klint pointed out that hardships are unique to every property and in his view, moving the home closer to the less busy road and away from the high traffic road seemed like a logical hardship to improve die propeity. He encouraged the Council to consider what was in the best interest of the community, to clean up this parcel and restore the fire lane side yard to its natural state or remodel the existing noncompliant residence. McMillan maintained that, oftentimes, homeowners on either side of fire lanes encroach more and more, while it is the City’s responsibility to preserve and retain these ROW’S. White stated that he felt hard pressed to overturn staffs recommendation, since there is adequate buildable space on the property. Though sympadietic to the applicant’s position. Mayor Peterson stated dot she concurred with White. Klint stated dut the fear of setting a precedent in the future should not blind the Council from making a reasonable decision adopting a good plan for this application. He maintained that while the Coimcil had a fiduciary respoiuibility to its constituents, staff does not hold the same level of responsibility to the public and makes recommendations based by the book. McMillan asked the applicant whether he wished to table to redesign or move forward with a vote. Klint stated that he could not imagine how he could make the home work for him if be were forced to redesign to fit the buildable area, as he had attempted several designs already to no avail. He indicated that he would likely give up and do something else with the property. Attorney Barrett pointed out that if the applicant were denied his application, he could not reapply for 6 months. Klint asked to proceed. Saucvcrc moved. Mayor Pctcrsoa seconded, to direct staff to direct a resolutloa approving a lot area and lot width variance bat denying the side street setback variance for property located at 1345 Rest Point Lane, once the applicant has sabmittcd a revised phin indoding a gradiag and drainage plan for City Engineer review and approval. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. > 4. PAGE 4 of 9