12-12-2016 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO TRUTH -IN -TAXATION MEETING and the ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, December 12, 2016 6:30 o'clock p.m. 20. #16-3884 JEFF AND PIA SCHUTT — 2750 CASCO POINT ROAD — APPEAL (continued) Schutt stated they just moved in at the end of August and that they plan to add the greenery in the spring. Schutt stated the structure provides kind of a definition to the left-hand side of the house. Jeff Schutt stated the retaining wall is one part of the French drain and that the drain actually sits above the retaining wall and consists of river rock. Schutt stated the French drain did not look nice on their property or the neighbor's property and that they have submitted a letter in support of the pergola from the neighbor. Pia Schutt stated the neighbor agrees that architecturally it fits with the home. Schutt stated the structure would not look proper if it was cut down to six feet and that they are looking for the City Council to agree that it does not seem to meet the idea of a fence. Schutt stated it also does not meet the other attachment to the house, which makes it a unique structure. Jeff Schutt stated they honestly believed it was in their plans and approved the whole time. McMillan asked if the height of the structure was called out on the plan. Pia Schutt indicated it was not. Curtis stated typically when a pergola or arbor type structure is included in the plans, an elevation view is provided. Curtis stated it was not noted on the plan that it would be anything more than a landscaping element so Staff could have missed it. McMillan stated it would have been hard to know without an elevation view. Printup asked what the process would be for an after -the -fact variance rather than looking at it as a fence Curtis stated Staff is not looking at it as a fence but merely tried to find a section of the code where it would fit so it could be defined. Curtis indicated the applicants could apply for a variance as the structure is right now or Staff could be directed to bring back a code amendment if the Council feels the situation is ambiguous. Pia Schutt stated they were hoping they would not have to go through the variance process since it is costly and time consuming. Schutt stated they would prefer to have the City Council simply approve it. Mattick stated the code applies equally to all residents and that one option is a variance. A variance would allow something to be located within the side yard. Mattick stated the Council cannot approve something simply because it looks nice and that this is an appeal of a determination by Staff. Levang commented it puts the Council in a tough spot. Levang stated the structure might look appropriate architecturally but that the City Attorney is saying the Council cannot approve something based on the fact that it looks nice. Pia Schutt asked what it would take to address the fact that it is not a fence. Page 24 of 33