07-14-1997 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 23,1997 (#11 - #2248 David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Jabbour asked about mitigation of the flood plain. Rahn said he would have to dig out the soib and switch with the soils where the cabin currwitly sits. Jabbour said he was concerned with setting a precedent of allowng structure in front of the 75' setback. Rahn reported that Lot 22 was granted 29% hardcover in the 0-75' setback in 1983. He also indicated that the adjacent property owner had sold a pie-shaped portion of property to the owner of his lot in 1962 in order to make the lot buildable. The home on lot 22 is located on the hill at the back of the lot. Rahn also noted there is City sewer to the current structure location. Jabbour noted the structure is sitting between two vital zones, the 0-75* setback and the flood plain. Goetten said she could not support the application that adds to structure in the 0-75' setback. She would only consider replacement. Goetten informed Rahn that there are homes that ^mply cannot be added onto. She suggested Rahn add structure to the rear but understood he said he could not mitigate. Rahn responded that mitigation could take place but would require extensive en^neering of the design. He suggested altering or eliminating the decks. Goetten said the lot is only 1/3 acre in the one acre zoning and Rahn is asking for too much structure proposed'm the 0-75' setback. Jabbour suggested Rahn add the structure upward. Van Zomeren noted that all buildable lots are allowed a 1500 s.f. footprint. She asked if the Council would prefer the applicant move the structure back into the flood plain. Van Zomeren asked for Council direction on these matters. Jabbour questioned whether the plan is sensitive to the watershed and the flood plain. He noted the floor plan is proposed at 1320 s.f. Goetten and Jabbour both acknowledged the 1500 s.f allowed but noted that the amount is allowed outside of the 0-75' setback. Goetten expressed surprised that the Planning Commission recommended approval. She said more thought should have been given to the plan. Rahn addressed the idea of two stories. He indicated the present plan is for a 1-1/2 story structure. While the rear of the structure is 30', the side is only 15' and would create the look of what he called a "double-decker bus" if he utilized a two-stoiy plan. He indicated that the neighbors supported the proposed plan and the ndghbor to the rear was concerned with obstruction of lake views. Rahn suggested considering the open land owned by the adjacent neighbor as making up for the additional hardcover. Jabbour informed him that this option was not possible. Goetten suggested the applicant speak whh Staff regarding other options. 1