Laserfiche WebLink
U <br />0---.- <br />• <br />MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY .COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday,! April 14, 2008 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(6. #08 -3335 DOUGLAS W. AND <br />Continued) <br />Franchot indicated they have spoken with all of <br />are in agreement with the plan. Franchot stated <br />property and the neighbors and that the two site; <br />immediately on their back line and dramatically <br />located approximately 50 to 60 feet from their d <br />proposal to locate the pool more in the center of <br />Franchot noted they do meet all of the City's re <br />being located in front of the principal structure. <br />Murphy asked the applicant to discuss the se <br />location. <br />S. FRANCHOT, 2010 COLINDRIVE, <br />heir neighbors regarding their proposal and that they <br />hey have attempted to create a sensible plan for their <br />that technically are conforming would locate the pool <br />,loser to their neighbors' house to the north, which is <br />ck. Franchot stated they have attempted with this <br />heir lot. <br />for the setbacks except for the structure <br />system and the trees on the lot and their general <br />Franchot indicated his lot contains a number of mature .trees, and illustrated on the overhead the three <br />separate areas where the mature trees are located. If the pool were located in the rear, a number of <br />mature trees would need to be removed. Franchot pointed out the two areas that have been designated <br />as septic sites. I <br />McMillan inquired whether there are any other <br />Franchot stated there is not. <br />Bremer stated in her view the Planning Commis; <br />addressed the issues that were pertinent to the ap <br />the discretion to look at this application from a d <br />an issue with the pool house and that she person; <br />behind the house due to the visual impact of the <br />available for a septic site. <br />was correct in their recommendation and <br />ation but pointed out the City Council does have <br />rent perspective. Bremer indicated she does have <br />would attempt to locate the pool and pool house <br />cture from the street. <br />Franchot•noted if the pool were located behind the residence, the amount of sun the pool would <br />receive would be approximately two and a half hours a day. <br />McMillan stated the reason for not allowing <br />reduce visual clutter from the roadway. <br />Turner concurred that the regulations regarding <br />relate primarily to aesthetics. <br />buildings in front of a principal structure is to <br />structures in front of the principal structure <br />Franchot stated they were informed early on in the application process that one of the reasons for the <br />ordinance is to maintain the streetscape and not have intrusions into the neighbors' view. Franchot <br />noted there are only four lots on this private roa i and that the ordinance really does not apply in this <br />situation. <br />McMillan stated the view from the roadway wo d be dependent on how well the screening is <br />maintained in the future. <br />PAGE 3 of 13 <br />