Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, April 14, 2008 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />__________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />*9. #08-3354 KERN HOPPE, 1150 WYNDMERE ROAD – RENEWAL OF <br />PRELIMINARY PLAT – RESOLUTION NO. 5743 <br /> <br />Bremer moved, Rahn seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5743, a Resolution Extending the <br />Preliminary Approval of a Class II Subdivision for Property Located at 1150 Wyndmere Road. <br />VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. <br /> <br />10. #08-3350 J SVEN GUSTAFSON FOR FREDERICK PETERS, 3127 CASCO <br />CIRCLE – VARIANCES <br /> <br />J. Sven Gustafson, Stonewood, LLC, and Frederick Peters, Property Owner, were present. <br /> <br />Gustafson stated they are proposing to construct a tennis court larger than 1,000 square feet in the <br />street yard of a replacement residence and are requesting a variance to allow them to locate the tennis <br />court between the house and the street; a side setback variance to place the tennis court 22 feet from <br />the northerly property line, and a hardcover variance to have 37 percent hardcover in the 250 to 500 <br />foot zone. <br /> <br />The owner is proposing to remove the existing house and tennis court and construct a new house and <br />tennis court. The new house would be located where the rear portion of the existing tennis court is. <br />The new tennis court would be located between the birch trees in the island in the existing driveway <br />and the street. The net result of the proposal would result in a reduction in the hardcover. The <br />topography of the site is steep and is a challenging lot to locate the house in a location that conforms <br />with Orono’s codes. Gustafson indicated the location of the residence is pretty limited to the proposed <br />location given the various setbacks that would need to be complied with. <br /> <br />Rahn asked whether it would make sense for the City to have city-owned tennis courts rather than <br />have individual property owners construct tennis courts on their lots. <br /> <br />Gustafson stated if the applicant is unable to relocate the tennis court, he would likely remodel the <br />residence and leave the tennis court as is. <br /> <br />Murphy asked whether the drainage issues have been resolved. <br /> <br />Kellogg noted there was an easement granted to the neighboring property owner that restricts what can <br />be done on this site. <br /> <br />Turner stated the present drainage does not function adequately and that the neighbor has indicated he <br />is fine with the location of the house. <br /> <br />Gustafson stated basically the street side of the property drains to the area that is delineated in red on <br />the overhead and that they would like to pitch the driveway to the south more to help drain the water <br />away from the neighbor’s easement and help direct the runoff across the property. <br /> <br />Kellogg pointed out the orientation of the garage also restricts the ability to construct a swale in that <br />area. Kellogg noted they would be visiting the property tomorrow to review the drainage situation and <br />that it is likely the applicant would need to submit some drainage calculations and a revised drainage <br />plan showing how they would handle the runoff. <br /> <br />PAGE 9 of 13 <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda - 04/28/08 <br />Approval of Council Minutes 04/14/08 [Page 9 of 13]