My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-27-2003 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2003
>
01-27-2003 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/16/2012 9:49:18 AM
Creation date
5/16/2012 9:49:18 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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, January 27, 2003 <br />• 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />( #02 -2860 SUNSTATE CONCEPTS, Continued) <br />Gaffron concurred, stating that a rebuild would not be allowed to remain since it would not <br />meet septic guidelines. This application is the same, there is a conforming system, <br />however no alternate site for the septic. <br />Murphy asked what would happen to the remaining piece of driveway /garage slab with <br />construction. <br />As he was trying to watch expenses, Gorr stated that the excavator would remove the <br />whole slab and reuse the existing foundation. <br />With regard to the potential for a future trail through the neighborhood, Murphy felt they <br />could not allow the home to be built any closer to the rail corridor. <br />Gorr felt the rail, the wetland, and the proximity of the cul -de -sac provided him with <br />adequate hardship trying to build on this property. In addition, Gorr felt the 2 -acre zoning <br />district was inaccurate. <br />Gaffron stated that the City purposefully chose that zoning to disallow dividing lots. He <br />• agreed, were the lot in the 1 -acre zone, the applicant would merely need to meet a 10' side <br />setback and 35' front setback. <br />• <br />White concurred with the Planning Commission recommendation requiring the applicant <br />to hook up to municipal sewer. He was concerned that, if the applicant did not do so, the <br />new owners would be saddled with an unexpected problem. <br />Gorr pointed out that the sewer inspector had led him to believe that there was no <br />requirement requiring him to abandon the existing conforming system if he stayed with a <br />four bedroom home. He argued that he wasn't even aware that the sewer was in question <br />until Wednesday of last week when he went before the Planning Commission. In fact, he <br />maintained that he had spoken to Paul Weinberger and Lyle Oman prior to purchasing the <br />property regarding these issues. <br />Gaffron stated that staff tries to answer the public's questions, but on occasion, the final <br />determination cannot be made until all of the facts are considered. Gaffron reiterated that <br />staff was currently proposing what they felt to be the right thing to do. <br />Sansevere agreed that the only reason for pause, might be that the applicant believed he <br />could keep the existing septic and bought the home on that premise. Sansevere asked <br />Gaffron if he felt strongly that this be the recommendation. <br />PAGE 23 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.