10-26-2009 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 12, 2009 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of 16 (9. #09-3424 MICHAEL AND DONNA EBERTZ, 1220 TONKAWA ROAD, Continued) Ebertz indicated it consists of pavers that are partially permeable. McMillan indicated she is in agreement that the gate needs to be relocated. Franchot asked where the 40 foot requirement comes from. Curtis stated it is a city requirement based on the fact that the property adjoins a county road. Gaffron stated at the time the 40-foot standard was incorporated, Staff looked at different variations of vehicles that could be stacked in the driveway. The 40 feet allowed for two vehicles to be stacked safely. Curtis stated the vehicles depicted in the photographs are deliberately parked and do not reflect a normal pulling in and parking situation. Steingas pointed out that the gate would be in the open position the majority of the time. McMillan commented that the Council cannot take that into consideration. Franchot stated it seems to him to be somewhat inconsistent that credit is not given for permeable materials to be utilized when the City looks favorably upon them. Franchot noted the gate is not mechanized and that it would be likely it is left open the majority of the time. Bremer asked why they are unable to comply with the 40-foot requirement. Franchot noted the gate would cover up the sidewalk. Steingas stated in order to clear the sidewalk, the gate would need to be positioned up higher. Steingas noted the 34-foot length allows for two large vehicles to be parked in the driveway and that he was going under the City’s old ordinance which required 34 feet. Bremer stated in her view the boulders and retaining wall are not an issue but that the setback variance is an issue. Bremer pointed out the applicant needs to demonstrate a hardship inherent to the land in order to be granted a variance and that she personally would fence the entire property at the 40-foot line, which would address the safety issue with the children. Murphy stated the City Council would have had some rationale in mind at the time they changed the requirement from 34 feet to 40 feet. Murphy stated in his opinion the gate and monuments are more for aesthetics rather than for ensuring the safety of the children. Ebertz stated they moved into this property in June and that he never envisioned at the time the house was constructed that he would be this close to the road, which then raised a safety concern for his children. The front yard is basically the only spot on the lot that his children will be able to ride a bicycle or play in a flat area and that he is willing to look at whether a fence should be erected rather than the gate. Due to the 75-foot setback, they are located closer to the road than originally contemplated and that if the gate is required to be relocated further back, they would not be able to utilize the sidewalk. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 10/26/09 Approval of Council Minutes 10/12/09 [Page 12 of 16]