06-27-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r j-*- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 13, 1994 (•#10)#1028 SUZANNE K. WACKER, 1115 BROWN ROAD SOUTH VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3458 It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Jabbour, to adopt Resolution No. 3438 approving #1928 variance for Suzanne K. Wacker at 11 IS Brown Road South, as recommended by the Planning Commission. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#11) #1930 MARGARET P. COST, 255 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3439 Mabusth reviewed the proposal andi the Planning Commission recommendation. Margaret Cost was present. Hu:” asked why there was not a shared driveway because the drop in elevation would make a shared driveway the best choice for this area. Goetten concurred and stated she would like to see both property owners work together to resolve this. Mabusth noted that the Council four years ago had approved a separate access for this project and there was a resolution on file. Margaret Cost stated she would prefer to have a separate driveway because the differences in grade would make a driveway coming from her neighbor ’s property extremely steep, and she did not feel that was safe. She was also concerned about the neighbor ’s children playing in their driveway, and believed separate access for her property was the best solution for this property. Discussion ensued regarding why the variance was needed based on the topography and the wetland regulations. The building envelope was discussed and alternatives for the building footprint were examined. The slopes were discussed and the maintenance of a 2:1 slope was explained. Adrian Kearney, 265 South Brown Road, stated he was concerned about the driveway and the slopes. They felt that a smaller house would fit better on the site. He felt the proposed plan was too aggressive a plan and the location of the driveway was very close to their property line. He felt they should share a driveway access. Kelley inquired if Mr. Kearney was aware of the subject lot when he purchased his property, and Mr. Kearney responded that he had researched this area thoroughly prior to purchasing his home. Mabusth stated that the driveway issue was settled four years ago and that to change the access now to a shared access may result in both the Court and the City being placed in a difficult legal dilemma with the current owner. Goetten inquired if there would be any liability on the part of the City if the tributary should flood and Mabusth responded that the house would be too high to be affected by any flooding. rtiTiJfiMiiil ill