02-13-2012 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, February 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. *7. #11 -3527 JASON AND JODY SMITH, 2690 RAINEY ROAD — VARIANCE — RESOLUTION NO. 6111 Franchot moved, Bremer seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6111, a Resolution Granting a Variance to Municipal Zoning Code 78 -420 (b) for the property located at 2690 Rainey Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 8. #12 -3539 SURYA AND ANTHONY ROCHEL, 125 TURNHAM ROAD — VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Planner Ben Gozola stated the subject property is located in the western portion of the community and south of the Luce Line Trail and south of Turnham Road. There is a shared driveway off of Turnham Road, parallel to the Luce Line, which services another property before it goes down to the subject property. Gozola displayed an aerial photo of the subject project and pointed out that there is a smaller home to the north and some fairly substantially sized homes to the east and southeast. There is a small shed on the property and a large clearing in front of the existing home. In addition, there is a large wetland in the front. Gozola stated the next slide shows the existing conditions on the lot. The dotted line indicates the required setbacks on the property given the zoning classification of RR -1A. The two structures on the property are nonconforming. The property is subdivided into two lots, which would be combined as a component of the project. There is also some potential flooding associated with the wetland in the spring, which has resulted in the conditional use permit request. Gozola noted the applicant has updated his survey to show a revised driveway configuration. The unrevised survey correctly depicts the trees and the proposed grading on the site. As it relates to the 14 criteria code requirements, this request does meet those requirements. The area is guided and zoned for single - family homes. The applicant is proposing to raze the existing house and construct a new residence. The small size of the lot is a unique characteristic since this is a five acre district. Staff is recommending approval of the lot area variance. As it relates to the CUP, there is a code interpretation issue. Gozola stated in reviewing applications, he typically uses the City's historic interpretation, but when the historic interpretation can put the City in a bad position if challenged, he must address those issues in his report. He then examined the four sections of the code that deal with land alteration. Section 966 is entitled prohibition, which basically says that a person cannot move dirt in Orono without a CUP. If the ground is elevated, the existing grade is altered, or the shoreline is modified, the City requires a CUP. Section 967 sets out an exemption to the CUP requirement for land alteration activities in that normal and customary grading approved as part of a building permit can be administratively approved by the building inspector. However, if a person is doing normal grading on a lot without a building permit, they are required to get a CUP. If the applicant is proposing unusual land alterations, the building inspector has the right to say that he /she cannot approve the building permit and that the applicant must apply for a conditional use permit. And finally, if the building inspector is in doubt of anything, it can be referred back for a CUP. • The final two sections governing land alteration relate to riprap and alterations near the shoreline. The permit section requires that accurate documentation must be provided. Page 5 of 22