07-28-2003 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 28, 2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. • (PHILLIP SMITH, 2600 WEST LAFAYETTE ROAD, Continued) with its existing codes, is forcing people to build a bunch of tall tight structures on the lake by requiring 25% in the 75 -250' etc. He questioned whether this was good for the character of the lake community. Beyond reductions in hardcover, Smith indicated that he would be willing to redirect water flow from his home away from the lake via downspouts which would run to the back side of his property. He asked that, if he was required to remove 300 s.f. or more, that he choose how it be removed from the 0 -75' versus being forced to remove the shed which compliments the house. Smith acknowledged that the Planning Commission told him the Council would likely turn him down, but he wished to present his case nonetheless. He felt his home and addition maintained the original lake character of the lake as designed and asked to be given his variances. Murphy questioned whether water diversion could really help offset the hardcover as proposed. Gaffron pointed out that water runoff either runs toward the lake or away from the lake on • this site and could all be directed one way or the other. He stated this is unique to this site, in that water could infiltrate before it hits the lake. Smith stated that the patio is stone with adequate spacing for infiltration, he reiterated that his was not a grand home. White questioned whether the City had ever entertained removal ratios of other than 1:1 in the past. Gaffron stated. that, typically, the City has gone for 1:1 ratios to obtain equal trades. He indicated that he would have to struggle to find any other similar cases historically. Sansevere asked if it could be done 1:1. Gaffron stated that patio removals could be made, perhaps some driveway removals, but few others. White suggested the applicant remove a portion of the driveway and allow people to park on the grass as he does. Smith stated that his screened in porch was a more important feature than the others. He asked, if the City was not willing to accept anything other than a 1:1 removal ratio, even though his lot was annexed to the City from Navarre and legally platted as it was, was • PAGE 12 of 18