10-23-2006 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 9, 2006 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ (7. #06-3231 WILLIAM S. DAMPIER, 3550 IVY PLACE, Continued) Peterson noted the applicant was advised in writing that the cantilevered areas are in violation of City Code. Dampier stated he was informed of that after that portion of the residence was constructed. Peterson stated the applicant has acknowledged that he violated what the City approved in 2000. Dampier stated he had previously spoken with Gaffron and the building inspector and they indicated they would support his application. Dampier stated when he drew the line to 16 feet, Gaffron drew a different line and he proceeded to construct according to that line. Sansevere inquired whether Gaffron is in support of what the applicant is now proposing. Gaffron stated he is not supporting the current application, and that if he gave the applicant any impression that he might support this application, it was always with the caveat that the City Council had to approve the application. Dampier stated on the city’s survey there are two lines drawn showing his original line and Gaffron’s compromise. Gaffron stated they are merely lines on paper and do not document approval or any support on his part. Gaffron stated there have been discussions in the past about additions to the house but with the understanding that the Planning Commission and City Council had to review and approve the plans. Dampier stated he took the word of Gaffron that he would be able to proceed forward with his plans and that he was not aware of the proper process. McMillan stated the paper trail in this application is very difficult to follow and that the building plans are not formal plans. Dampier stated the discussions centered around what happened prior to him proceeding forward with that portion of the house and that those conversations were not documented. Dampier stated he did not have the money to construct the entire house at that time and was only intending to construct a small portion of it. Dampier stated none of the original plans went beyond the existing structure. McMillan stated the additions were phased in and the structural coverage was not adequately kept track of. Dampier indicated during the project he would tear down one wall and then reconstruct it. Peterson noted nothing on the lakeside was approved and that the applicant went ahead and decided to proceed with construction beyond what was approved in 2000. Peterson stated in order to get the addition on the street side, the City and the applicant compromised with the deck being terraced and that at that point in time his entire home was 14.8 percent structural coverage. ______________________________________________________________________________ PAGE 6 of 10 Item #02 - CC Agenda 10-23-06 Approval of Minutes 10-09-06 [Page 6 of 10]