08-12-2002 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (»7) U02-279I DA VEAND JODI RAHN, 1385 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - Continued Mayor Peterson stated that although she was present at those meetings, she remembers most vividly the discussions of 1998. She believed that when he last came before the Council there was an animated discussion with regard to the detached garage around the floodplain. She had voted in favor of the additional hardcover for the detached garage in 1998, with the stipulation that she would not allow any more hardcover on that property. She stated she would stick to that position tonight and not vote in favor of what he was proposing. She stated that she would be more agreeable to his proposal if he were removing the e.xisting garage and driveway, and replacing it with the new garage attached to the home. Rahn asked to e.xplain what he believed happened, with regard lo the approvals, but first, he reminded the Council that he had not been the one to consider this property in the floodplain, but it was the City that had determined it on their topography map. The City had informed him it was a floodplain, which is one reason ne iiud been limited in obtaining his IS% structural coverage. The other reason, he believed, was that the property was presented as a minimum square foot lot. The house and lot were planned at 1490 s.f., to fall under the ISOO s.f. allowance, when in fact, Rahn maintained the lot should be allowed 2200 s.f. He stated that the lot next door was built just last year and was allowed 700 s.f. more hardcover on a lot that is 2000 s.f. smaller than his. Rahn disagreed with Mayor Peterson's position that she did not support his proposal, when in his view, there were totally new findings since 1997 -1998 with regard to the floodplain. If this were a 1500 s.f. property, Rahn felt the approvals and limits made sense, however, Rahn maintained that the property should have been viewed as 2200 s.f. in light of the new' findings. He asked what part of the zoning ordinance he was missing which limits structural coverage beyond the 15%. Mayor Peterson maintained that she did not think they were talking structural coverage, but hardcover. Rahn stated that they were asking him to remove structural coverage and not hardcover. Mayor Peterson stated that her issue was with the fact that they have more than 25.3% hardcover. Rahn pointed out that, if the issue was hardcover, the City should take a look at his neighbors. Thu new ne.xt door home to the south was allowed a total lot cover of 23.5%, almost a full % more than he was proposing at 22.6%. He maintained that, in fact, if he took the same percents tliat were allowed on the lot next to him, and used them on his lot he would be allowed 34.45%, when what he is proposing is 31.4%. The home across the street was allowed 29.8% total lot hardcover, whereas this is proposed at 22.6%. He added that the home down from him was allowed both 31.4% cover and to exceed his structiual cover by 500 s.f., when in fact, the lot is smaller than his by 1500 s.f and has 700 s.f more hardcover. He stated it was never indicated during any of the meetings he attended that the neighbor’s proposal had excessive coverage. PAGE 11 of 35