05-13-1996 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

•e MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 13, 1996 (#4 - #2088 Winfield Stephens - Continued) • Jabbour said he saw the project as a rebuild and preferred that the original house be torn down and the new home placed farther away from the road. He then noted the review done by the Planning Commission and the lot being buildable with its sewer unit. Jabbour said the property owner is entitled to a house, and even though it is ambitious, it has been reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. Jabbour said he would prefer the setbacks be changed from 3' to 10' and 40' from the roadway. He continued that he is concerned with granting a 0' setback, but if the Staff is comfortable that the vacation is legal and there is a 15' setback, he would approve it. Callahan and Goetten both expressed concern over the setback. Goetten preferred that the house be moved forward. Goetten said she would like to see improvements to the plan. She noted the right of the owner to build on the property but noted the size of the lot. Jabbour asked Stephens if there was value in the existing building or if he was attempting to accommodate the City's requirement of using the existing foundation. Stephens said he never looked at any other option and believes the house would sit best as proposed. Kelley noted the mature oak trees on the property. Stephens said two would be eliminated but 6 would remain. Maple trees are also located on the property. Goetten moved, to refer the application back to the Planning Commission. Jabbour • informed the applicant that if the application was denied, he would not be able to present another application for six months. Stephens said he began the process in November. He said it was his understanding that if the foundation was sound and utilized, the plans could be accepted. Stephens said it was also his understanding from Mabusth and the Planning Commission that he was allowed 15% of the total acreage for structural coverage. The proposed structural coverage is 14.3 %. Stephens said he was told that he would need to vacate the alley, which he has done, and to come to an agreement with the homeowners of Landmark Drive, which he has also completed. Stephens said the other neighbor to the north is satisfied with the plans. Stephens said he has been before the Planning Commission three times and is anxious to move forward. Goetten said she is still concerned with the size of the structure for the small lot. Callahan seconded the motion previously made by Goetten. (Hurr arrived at this time.) 6 L�