05-08-2006 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

0 0 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 8, 2006 7:00 o'clock p.m. (4. #05 -3136 TROYBROITZMAN, 1860 Mrs. Coward pointed out that they have would continue to impact them the full ] rear at grade. DRIVE, Continued) y been impacted by tree removals and that this of their property with the driveway proposed in the Morris Nelson, 1860 Shoreline Drive, stated that he continued to object to the proposal, pointing out that the footprint of his home was 1900 s.£, even if the applicants home was placed over his footprint, the massing would negatively impact him and his neighbors. Broitzman indicated that the runoff along Heritage Drive currently runs onto his property. Mrs. Coward pointed out that based on the origin has always been there and was not simply created White asked what the proposed footprint for Broitzman stated that the footprint would be Sansevere asked whether the Council could the driveway. Since the applicant was asking for three vark certain factors to their approvals if they deerr massing. He indicated that the Council could massing and could word their motion for den Sansevere asked whether the Council massing. al aerials, the wetland on the applicant's property by the Cowards' driveway. new residence would be. s.f., 1419 of which would be garage. it the massing of the structure or the placement of es, Attorney Brokl stated that the Council could tie the lot was too narrow to support the proposed ny the application if they did not support the accordingly. were in agreement that they had trouble with the Mayor Peterson stated that she had difficulty allowing the level of proposed mass, since the lot is so narrow and the proposed dwelling does not fit the character or scale of what exists. She commented that she was disappointed in the clear cutting of the pines out front which might have helped screen some of the proposed massing. White moved, Mayor Peterson seconded, to propose that the driveway run from County Road 15 and a reduction in massing by 15' %. While she admitted that massing is a problem, inevitable as massing continues to be a problei something is put on the books about massing, isolated case and say it is massing. She believ( codes, the Council should be consistent, thoug Brokl interjected that there is a motion on the t could not be easily administered. As there was suggested that the Council deny the applicatioi the conditions as the Council sees fit. McMillan questioned how the City could deny the as property values get higher. She stated that, until ie found it difficult to put her finger on just one that if the applicant's proposal fell within the they may not like it, and allow him to do so. ble requiring a 15% reduction as a condition that i draft resolution within the Council packet, Brokl or approve it as requested with conditions or alter PAGE 7 of 17