Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, July 22,2002 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />(U7) U02 ‘279l DAVE AND JOD! RAHN, 1385 REST POINT ROAD-VARIANCES- <br />Continued <br />Rahn insisted that he had supplied the City mth new findings with regard to the floodplain to <br />support his application for the attached garage and urged the Council to factor this into their <br />consideration, ^en he first applied for variances, it was the City’s own topo map that indicated <br />the fl^plam, therefore, he designed his proposal around that feature. He asked what would <br />lead him to question the City’s topo map, he believed the City had supplied him with accurate <br />mformation. Only when he looked into purchasing flood insurance and invited the MCWD to <br />look more closely at his property, did he learn that there was obviously no connection to the lake <br />which coupled with the elevation did not equate to a floodplain. He questioned whether it should <br />be the resident s responsibility to challenge the City’s resources. <br />Severe asked staff if there had ever been any precedent set where a resident had built usina <br />misinformation, and if so, what had been done to right the situation. <br />Gaf^n stated t^t he had reviewed the minutes from the 1997 and 1998 meetings, and argued <br />that the application started out as an addition and rebuild. He questioned the intent of leaving the <br />home in its current location all along. <br />Rato ar^ed that he tod looked into other possibilities, but once he had learned of the floodplain <br />delmeation, why would he have proposed the house in a location the City would not have <br />allow^ him to build. Rato questioned why he would have ever been willing to swap the high <br />ground for the low ground, thinking there was a floodplain. ^ ^ <br />Weinberger asked what prompted Rato to contact Hafner of the MCWD. <br />Rahri repeated that he had begun to investigate the need for flood insurance and found out that <br />the elevation alone did not define floodplain. He questioned how the floodplain delineation was <br />never resolved back when City staff visited the ptoperty. Rahn could not understand why staff <br />didn t make the connection when they walked the property back in 1997. <br />Sansevere asked for Administrator Moorse’s comments. <br />Mooi^ stated that first it w^ an addition to a small cabin, and then the applicant needed a <br />etached g^ge, both of which maxed out the hardcover. Now the applicant would like a second <br />garage without removing the existing garage. <br />ffltWs'Im ^rmiie"^* "^'^information about the floodplain should be factoredmor <br />th^oUicr g^^e**"** attached garage, Moorse questioned the hardship for keeping <br />PAGE 14 of 35