03-22-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

f MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 8,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. Mr. Switz stated that the reality is that the precedent is already out there. He maintained that this is a unique property and that their proposed improvements will be significant, not only reducing the structural coverage to \S%, but also removing virtually all structure within the 0*7S‘ zone. He pointed out that they have attempted to work with staff to get a minimal driveway and apron, while maintaining ample space for die home. Switz indicated that hardships exist, as admitted by stafC and accepted by the Planning Commission 6/0 to warrant the amount of hardcover proposed in this application. He pointed out that the Planning Commission fought thru many of these same issues faced by the City Council and cam to their unanimous conclusion that this was reasonable. If the home was moved closer to the road to reduce the amount of driveway hardcover this would not make a better situation eidier. Switz maintained diat the City should take the magnitude of the proposed improvements into consideration along with all of the other factors, since die home will be in conformancy to all but the hardcover condition. He believed that this would be the most consistent conclusion the City could reach, given the odier trade-offs, especially since it is the preservation and protection of the lake which takes precedence to all else. Murphy questioned whedier die property would indeed be improving the 0-75’ zone situation significantly. Gundlach stated that a significant portion of the current home and deck falls within the 0-75’ zone. Murphy maintained that, since die applicants would be clearing out over 2,000 s.f. of hardcover in the 0-75’ zone, and that the variance request generally is impacting the driveway on the street side, he would side with White and Mayor Peterson. Murphy stated that based on the shape of the lot, and the fact that his biggest concern involves the lakeside, he would not wish to cause any safety problems on the streetside by imposing further limitations. Sansevere pointed out that, by Code, applicants do not get ’bonus points’ for removals within the 0-75’ setback zone. While he wished to give the applicants some leeway to sec this proposal to fruition, he asked if the City had a legal obligation to the contrary. Mrs. Switz indicated that during their first visits to the Planning Commission, diey were told by staff and the Commission that if they could get the structural cover down to 15%, they would be PAGE 7 of 23