My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-22-2002 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
07-22-2002 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/30/2012 3:31:24 PM
Creation date
3/30/2012 3:31:24 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, July 22, 2002 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />( #7) #02 -2791 DAVE AND JODI RAHN,1385 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - <br />Continued <br />Mayor Peterson stated that although she was present at those meetings, she remembers most <br />vividly the discussions of 1998. She believed that when he last came before the Council there <br />was an animated discussion with regard to the detached garage around the floodplain. She had <br />voted in favor of the additional hardcover for the detached garage in 1998, with the stipulation <br />that she would not allow any more hardcover on that property. She stated she would stick to that <br />position tonight and not vote in favor of what he was proposing. She stated that she would be <br />more agreeable to his proposal if he were removing the existing garage and driveway, and <br />replacing it with the new garage attached to the home. <br />Rahn asked to explain what he believed happened, with regard to the approvals, but first, he <br />reminded the Council that he had not been the one to consider this property in the floodplain, but <br />it was the City that had determined it on their topography map. The City had informed him it was <br />a floodplain, which is one reason he had been limited in obtaining his 15% structural coverage. <br />The other reason, he believed, was that the property was presented as a minimum square foot lot. <br />The house and lot were planned at 1490 s.f., to fall under the 1500 s.f. allowance, when in fact, <br />Rahn maintained the lot should be allowed 2200 s.f. He stated that the lot next door was built <br />just last year and was allowed 700 s.f. more hardcover on a lot that is 2000 s.f. smaller than his. <br />Rahn disagreed with Mayor Peterson's position that she did not support his proposal, when in his <br />view, there were totally new findings since 1997 -1998 with regard to the floodplain. If this were <br />a 1500 s.f. property, Rahn felt the approvals and limits made sense, however, Rahn maintained <br />that the property should have been viewed as 2200 s.f. in light of the new findings. He asked <br />what part of the zoning ordinance he was missing which limits structural coverage beyond the <br />15 %. <br />Mayor Peterson maintained that she did not think they were talking structural coverage, but <br />hardcover. <br />Rahn stated that they were asking him to remove structural coverage and not hardcover. <br />Mayor Peterson stated that her issue was with the fact that they have more than 25.3% hardcover. <br />Rahn pointed out that, if the issue was hardcover, the City should take a look at his neighbors. <br />The new next door home to the south was allowed a total lot cover of 23.5 %, almost a full % <br />more than he was proposing at 22.6 %. He maintained that, in fact, if he took the same percents <br />that were allowed on the lot next to him, and used them on his lot he would be allowed 34.45 %, <br />when what he is proposing is 31.4 %. The home across the street was allowed 29.8% total lot <br />hardcover, whereas this is proposed at 22.6 %. He added that the home down from him was <br />• allowed both 31.4% cover and to exceed his structural cover by 500 s.f., when in fact, the lot is <br />smaller than his by 1500 s.f. and has 700 s.f. more hardcover. He stated it was never indicated <br />during any of the meetings he attended that the neighbor's proposal had excessive coverage. <br />. - PA-GE-1 I of35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.