Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, March 14, 2016 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 9 of 37 <br /> <br />9. #16-3803 STONEWOOD, LLC, ON BEHALF OF TASHITAA TUFAA, 1830 <br />SHORELINE DRIVE, VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (continued) <br /> <br />McMillan stated now that the house is being moved ten feet further from the lake, it does not appear the <br />driveway will impact the neighbor as much but that she wants to make sure the apron does not cause a lot <br />of runoff. <br /> <br />Klint indicated there should not be a lot of runoff from the driveway and that the runoff is more directed <br />towards the lake. Klint indicated they are willing to work with the neighbor on the screening and that <br />they are allowed a 6-foot fence in that area, which would help block headlights shining onto the <br />neighbor’s property. <br /> <br />Gustafson stated as it relates to the width of the driveway, the narrowest width they typically go to is 12 <br />feet, which only gives a three-foot flare on each side. Gustafson stated they do not want to make the <br />corner too tight, which would result in people driving on the lawn. <br /> <br />McMillan stated she understands the desire for off-street parking but that her concern was with the width <br />of the driveway. McMillan stated the site does allow for quite a bit of movement of cars but that she does <br />not want it to be excessive. <br /> <br />Klint stated in their view this was the better scenario since it did not give the appearance of having a <br />parking lot or garage in front. The proposed design gives more of the illustration of a small street running <br />through the property rather than a large patch of asphalt in front of the garage. <br />Cornick stated the walkway leading to the house from the street seems to be redundant. <br /> <br />Klint stated the property owner was rather adamant about that and that it is a more pedestrian oriented <br />entrance to the lot rather than just the driveway. <br />Gustafson stated it effectively is a landscaping element and is meant to be welcoming. <br /> <br />Levang asked what it will be constructed of. <br /> <br />Klint indicated it most likely would be a paver of some sort. <br /> <br />Levang stated she understands the point of it being more welcoming for the neighbors. <br /> <br />Walsh stated he appreciates Mr. Winston’s comments about the Planning Commission and how there has <br />not been any concerns raised about the setback variance. Walsh stated he would like to set the record <br />straight and that he did have issue with a couple of the variances and that the Council did not have <br />agreement on the two curb cuts and the side setback issue. Walsh stated buying a corner lot is not a <br />practical difficulty in most people’s eyes since the person knows what they are buying. While the <br />Council did not give a specific number on the setback, Walsh stated he was hoping to see a complete <br />redesign with only one curb cut rather than simply a 3-foot reduction in the encroachment. <br /> <br />Walsh noted Mr. Winston also said that this site compels the need for variances but in his view it does <br />not. Walsh stated if someone wants to put something on a lot that does not fit, then it becomes an issue. <br />Walsh stated he is not adverse to a big house but that the applicant should try to fit the house on the lot <br />without variances.