01-12-1998 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 8,1997 (#5 - #2264 Janet Kieman - Continued) Gaffron said there is no question that the building inspector approved all of the steps taken and approved them because from a building code standpoint, the substandard portions could not be part of the new house. He said the project possibly could have been stopped earlier. Dzurik asked if it has any bearing that he had asked the inspector whether the removals would cause any problems and was told it would not. City Attorney Barrett said he is comfortable with telling the Council that they can enforce the conditions of the resolution as far as the building code has to be protected. As a question of law, the City has the right to enforce the findings. Jabbour asked Council for direction. Goetten noted the unfortunate situation. She said she is generally steadfast in such situations. Goetten said the applicant was put on notice when she applied for the variance that she had to comply with conditions of the resolution. She understood the applicant has been above board with the City but does not believe there is a win-win situation. Goetten felt the application should be reviewed again by the Planning Commission and the structure pulled back behind the 75' setback line. Jabbour asked Gaffron to show the site plan and the 75' setback line and house location. Kelley clarified that there were two variances required plus hardcover. Gaffron said the project is o\ er the 25% hardcover allow ed. Parts of the structure, terrace, and steps are located in the 0-75' setback. There is also need for an average lakeshore setback variance but that is not an issue. Jabbour asked if the structure could be moved to the north. Gaffron noted the location of trees to the north. Tom Kellogg said the sewer line comes in from the driveway, showing the location in the northwest comer, so this would not impact any construction. Dzurik informed Kieman that her sewer line was in place. Gaffron asked if any constmetion under the current approval would be allowed in the 0- 75' setback. Goetten asked how- far into the 0-75' setback any construction occurs. Gaffron said it was 6-8'. Jabbour asked if Council would support the plan if the structure was pulled out of the 0-75' zone. Kelley suggested he would support the structure if pulled back behind the 75 ‘ setback and to the north to meet the side setback requirement. Goetten said she was concerned more with the 0-75' setback.