07-25-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 9,2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. (#05-3091 Catherine Sallas, Continued) Gaffton stated a rooftop deck is a building issue and is not really a zoning issue except for that portion of the deck that encroa^.ies within the side yard setback. Sallas stated to her knowledge this house has existed in pretty much its present condition for the past 70 years. Sallas commented if the City were to examine every piece of property within the City, they would likely find numerous situations where structural coverage or hardcover has l^n added without the City’s knowledge. Murphy stated by definition this is a rooftop deck and that the City has nothing in their regulations that prohibits a rooftop deck. Gaffron stated the code addresses setbacks and heights and that a second story could potentially be approved on this residence. Murphy inquired what would need to be done structurally to the house if the deck were removed. Kellogg indicated he has not reviewed the deck personally and is unsure what work would be required to the residence. Gaflron stated in his opinion the roof was treated in some way to be made impervious and that he is unsure what needs to Ire done in order to remove the deck. Gaflron stated the building inspector would need to inspiret the roof to determine exactly what needs to be done. Murphy reiterated there is a droop in the roofline on the south side of the deck that should be examined. White stated he does not see a legal reason to not allow the deck. White noted fencing is not allowed within 7S feet of the lakeshore, and suggested a portion of the fencing be removed. White moved, Sausevere seconded, to approve an after-the-fact variance for the property located at 3635 North Shore Drive, subject to the removal of all fencing located within the 0-7b' zone and further subject to the removal of 140 feet of hardcover from the existing grade-level deck that extends lakeward of tho average lakeshore setback. Sallas stated she is not agreeable to removing all the fencing. Sallas stated that is a considerable amount of hardcover. Sallas stated at some point in the future this residence probably would be tom down but that she would like to keep what was on the property at the time she purchased it. Sallas stated in her opinion she is being asked to remove an unreasonable amount of hardcover. Sansevere stated the amount of hardcover the Council is asking be removed is really not a negotiation. McMillan noted the deck does encroach on the side yard setback and that that encroachment should be compensated in some way. McMillan inquired whether there is fencing on both sides of the house. PAGE 11