Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2003 <br />9. #02-2863 Richard Kail, 3753 Casco Avenue-Variances-Continued <br />White stated that the lot slopes with a steep drop-off, and therefore the house can't shift <br />around at all. <br />Kail stated that he paid $98,000 in cash for the lot and on his current budget will need to <br />build the house himself. <br />Sansevere asked if Kail knew the variance would be denied and was okay with that, since <br />the item had been put on the Consent Agenda. Bottenberg stated that he did. She <br />suggested he redesign the house to get it under 15% lot coverage and remove the need for <br />a variance. Kail brought her a design without the porch roof, but the hardcover remained <br />at 17.7% <br />Sansevere asked Bottenberg if she could find a hardship for the applicant. She stated she <br />could not, and neither could the Planning Commission. They want to be consistent in <br />requiring new construction to be under 15% lot coverage. <br />White stated that the vacant lot could not be developed because it is wetland, but if sold to <br />the Kail' s, it would be cleaned up and give him the necessary lot size to keep his house as <br />designed. <br />Gappa stated the lots were tax forfeited years ago. <br />Bottenberg stated that the Planning Commission only discussed vacating the alley, but not <br />the lots. Gappa stated they could consider keeping easements in the alleyway. <br />Nygard asked if adjacent land owners had first right of refusal when the City sells <br />property. <br />Gappa stated the alley was not of future value and the City could retain easements, but he <br />hated to give up a lot because of the potential use for stormwater management. <br />Bottenberg stated that if they vacated the alley, he would be at 15. 3 % lot coverage, <br />without the porch as a structure, or 66 s.f. over the allowed. <br />Gappa stated Kail would likely only get half the alley, and his neighbor would get the <br />other half. Bottenberg stated that with half the alley, he would be over his coverage by <br />254 s.f. <br />Kail suggested he could reduce the garage from a 3-stall to a 2-stall. Bottenberg stated <br />that with that reduction in the garage and half the alley, he would be within 15%. She <br />stated that the alley couldn't be vacated until it went before the Planning Commission at . <br />the March meeting. <br />5