05-28-2013 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 13, 2013 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 26 (6a. #13-3599 HOMETIME VIDEO PUBLISHING (DEAN JOHNSON), 80 CREEK RIDGE PASS – ATF VARIANCE – RESOLUTION NO. 6227, Continued) Bremer indicated it is 1,700 square feet. McMillan noted there appears to be quite a bit of bend in this line, and asked if the sewer line has been televised. Struve indicated Scott Oberainger was on site and the line was repaired to the City’s satisfaction but the line was not televised. The line was cleaned and repaired at that time. McMillan asked what the possible deviation in the line is. Struve stated any pipe material will allow for some deflection at each joint which can range up to about three degrees. Over a long period of time, it is not uncommon for there to be swoops in the pipe. Struve stated it is fairly common to see pipes that wander slightly. When Scott was on site, the pipe was found to be within ten feet, and normally the City would want a 10-foot separation in the event the pipe would ever have to be dug up. McMillan asked if Staff could have brought this before the Council in January. Gaffron indicated they could have. Gaffron stated in the future Staff will bring similar situations to the Council’s attention immediately. Mattick stated the City’s process for a variance is clear and that there is no way to circumvent that. In some minor situations, Staff can handle some situations administratively, and that in his opinion Staff was following the correct procedure by requiring the applicant to apply for an after-the-fact variance. Printup asked what would happen if they denied the after-the-fact variance. Mattick stated if it is denied, it is denied, but pointed out that this was not an ideal situation and some decisions had to be made in the field. It was Staff’s opinion that they would support the after-the-fact variance once it came before the City Council. Gaffron stated another option could be a lot line rearrangement but that would have an impact on the adjoining property. Gaffron stated if the intent is to keep the 60-foot separation, if a variance is requested for the adjacent lot that could be an opportunity for the Council to consider what options they have for maintaining the 60-foot setback. Bremer noted this lot is a lot of record and that they have a legal right to construct on the lot. Anderson indicated she is not comfortable with making the adjacent property make up for the shortfall on this lot. Mattick indicated the reason for relocating the house was because it was too close to a utility line and that the question comes down to whether the house should be further away from the utility line. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013 Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013 [Page 6 of 26]