08-11-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 28,2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. (RICHARD S. BROWN, 1300 SHORELINE DRIVE, Contiaued) 1 . Existing encroachments of wetland or required wetland setbacks by retaining walls, fill or paved surfaces shall be removed. 2. Retaining walls shall be removed wherever they extend outside the property boundaries, and any walls to remain within 5 ’ of the lot lines should be reviewed by staff to determine whether they are needed to support steep slopes or whether they are purely aesthetic in nature, and those not necessary to support the topography of the site shall be removed. 3. All landscape beds lined with fabric or plastic shall have such liner removed. The minority opinion of the Planning Commission was that the removals did not reach the 35% limit established by code and they failed to see a hardship supporting the variances. GafIron explained that staff believed the applicant had made a good faith effort to reduce hardcover to 39.7%. He indicated that if the Council concludes that the unique circumstances regarding the history of this property could be deemed as a hardship, then approval of the after-the-fact variances per the revised removal plan would be in order. Mr. Brown stood for questions, commenting that he was disappointed with the process this application had taken, although he felt that Gaflron had been fair and reasonable throughout. With regard to the history of this property, Murphy stated that the City had always had a difficult time with the previous owner, which was no reflection on Mr. Brown. He believed the City had ample opportunity to inspect the work in progress and that it was unfortunate that neighbors ’ calls that things were out of control were not followed up on. He was bothered by the fact that the hardcover was way over after construction was complete, that the owner/builder had taken the City for ‘a ride’, and that the new owner was left holding the bag. Brown questioned that, despite the neighbor ’s concern, when he called one month prior to closing on the property, the City did not express concern and told him that electric inspections etc. were all that remained. He felt the City had plenty of opportunity to catch this before it got to the point it was at w hen he purchased it. White stated that he believed Brown had gone to great lengths to reduce the hardcover by 20%, and agreed that the City did have chances to correct this problem earlier. He indicated that the Planning Commission spent much time debating the application and that he agreed with the recommendation. Mayor Peterson, too, saw the Planning Commission discussion and agreed that what the applicant had done was fair. Having driven past the home during construction, she questioned why it was never checked over a year period. She complimented the applicant for making the best of a bad situation. Sansevere believed appro\nng the application would not set any precedent, based on the histwy and unique set of circumstances surrounding the property which justified the hardship. PAGE6ofl8