Project Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 14, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. (#05-3142 Chapman, Continued) Gundlach stated the application does meet the intent of the code and does not propose any new hardcover, with all setbacks being met except for the setback from the front property line. Gundlach stated this application was submitted prior to the City's new wetland ordinance taking effect, but noted that the applicant is in compliance with the new rules. The Planning Commission, on a motion to deny, voted 4-1, with the dissenting commissioner stating support for a 10' by 10' shed pending removal of equal amounts of hardcover. The main issue discussed during the public hearing was the trading of nonstructural hardcover for structural hardcover and the issue of the applicant wanting to install steppingstones rather than a full paved sidewalk. Gundlach stated the minimum standard for a sidewalk width is two feet. The applicants would like to install steppingstones, which total 22.5 square feet and account for a reduction of 97 .5 square feet of existing sidewalk hardcover. Based on the length of sidewalk, if constrncted to the minimum width of two feet, the sidewalk hardcover would equal 51.5 square feet or account for a reduction of 68.5 feet of existing sidewalk hardcover. Chapman stated the two-foot sidewalk would allow a shed consisting of 118.5 square feet in area or approximately 10 by 12'. Staff recommends that the Council discuss the policies of n·ading non-structural hardcover for structural hardcover and weigh that discussion against the reasonableness of the request. Sansevere inquired whether the applicant has seen Staffs recommendation. Chapman stated he has reviewed Staffs report. Sansevere inquired whether the applicant is okay with the second reconunendation. Chapman stated he is okay with the recommendation. Chapman indicated he has recently found out that the front of his yard is really defined as the front lot line and that the City owns the snip of property going to the lake. Sansevere stated he would be willing to go·along with reconunendation two. White indicated he also concurs with recommendation two. Chapman stated he is tlu·illed to live in this area and has paid a substantial amount of money for the property and that he would like to place one 12' by 12' shed on the lot, which in his opinion is reasonable. Murphy inquired why the applicant did not consider adding onto the residence. Chapman stated they did consider that but that the shed would acconm1odate their needs and take up less space than a third stall on the garage. JPage 6