01-26-2004 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 26, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. • *5. #04 -2975 REVEREND LOREN D. DAVIS ON BEHALF OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD LUTHERAN CHURCH, 3745 SHORELINE DRIVE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT - RESOLUTION NO. 5106 Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5106, a Resolution granting a conditional use permit amendment for 3745 Shoreline Drive in order to change the roof structure from flat to pitched on the existing classroom portion of the church. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *6. #04 -2979 DR. DONALD RISTAD AND KENT CASSIDY, 1005 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD, VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 5107 Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5107, a Resolution granting a lot area variance and conditional use permit with variance to allow the existing pool to remain on a through lot and encroach into the 50' setback of Highway 12 for the residence located at 1005 Old Long Lake Road. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *7. #04 -2980 ORFIELD DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION INC. ON BEHALF OF MARILYN MCCLASKEY, 2693 KELLY AVENUE — VARIANCE — RESOLUTION NO. 5108 Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5108, a Resolution granting a front yard setback variance in order to add a second story over a portion of the • existing home 20' from the front property line where 35' is required for the residence at 2693 Kelly Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL REPORT McMillan reported that she had received a call from a citizen in the Crystal Bay neighborhood who was concerned by the increase in the variance fee. She believed the increase from $200 to $600 to be an excessive jump and prohibitive for small remodel jobs. McMillan asked if staff had received similar comments and invited Council members to comment. Gaffron stated that a half dozen new applications had been filed since the first of the year and he had not received complaints. He agreed that, for smaller neighborhoods, which often need to go through the variance process for any type of project, there might be alternatives. He questioned whether the City should consider rezoning the smaller neighborhoods to match the neighborhood's size in reality. Sansevere questioned whether the fee schedule had been changed to mirror the work load staff goes through in the variance process. He indicated that he had felt the fee jump was too high to start with; but, had gone along with the recommendation. McMillan questioned whether there was an innate fairness issue when a small lot is zoned 2 acres, and obviously does not fit that description, to be charged the higher fee. u PAGE 4 of 10