09-11-2006 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES �OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 11, 2006 • 7:00 o'clock P.M. • L (3. #04 -3069 G & L LAND INVESTMENTS, Gaffron demonstrated the location of the proposed level and will have less of a visual impact. In addi have been incorporated into the project. Staff is recommending approval of the average Longman stated he is representing the current owners he is here to answer any questions. 2665 MAPLERIDGE LANE, Continued) . The revised plan depicts the pool at a lower a retaining wall system and extensive landscaping setback variance. the property, John and Martha Stewart, and that Carlson indicated she is fine with the resolution of this matter, noting that a retaining wall to prevent their property from washing away would be constructed by the new property owners. Murphy commented it is nice to see how quickly this issue was resolved between the neighbors. Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, Application #04 -3069, G & L Land Investment, 2665 Mapleridge Lane, reaffirming its approval of the average setback variance granted in 2004 based on the revised site plan and revised pool location, and further based on the a -mails from Diane Carlson and Steve Longman agreeing on the location of the pool, with the understanding that the wall and path will be restored at no cost to the Carlsons. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 4. #06 -3206 KEN AND LORIJEAN VARIANCE Ken Anderson, Applicant, and Jeff Danbury, N, 4225 FOREST LAKE DRIVE — were present. White noted that Mr. Anderson was not present at the last meeting when this item was approved. Anderson stated he contacted Evelyn Turner following the last meeting indicating that he was surprised the City Council had not followed the recommendation of the Planning Commission to allow the extension of the garage and add the second story. Anderson stated he would like to clarify his variance request. At the Planning Commission on July 17`x', two plans were submitted for consideration. Anderson indicated Plan A, which is their preferred plan, includes the garage extension and the removal of the requested hardcover. Plan B is basically the same plan proposing the second story addition without the garage extension and the deck being left as is. I Anderson explained the dark line on the overhead is the property line, the portion in red is actually within the 10 -foot side yard, and the green portion consisting of 4.5 feet by 11 feet depicts the area that requires the variance. The property adjacent to this property belongs to the homeowner's association and is vacant. In consideration for the variance, Mr. Anderson indicated he would be agreeable to reducing a portion of the deck. Anderson commented he values deck and would like to retain it if at all possible. White stated at the last Council meeting the Council iwas in favor of a larger deck than had been recommended by the Planning Commission and were also in favor of the second story but were opposed to the side yard setback variance. White stated there was also a substantial amount of hardcover that was to be removed. PAGE 3 of 20