09-11-2006 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES, OF THE ORONO CITY COI, NCIL MEETING Monday, September 11, 2006 • 7:00 o'clock p.m. • • (4. #06 -3206 KEN AND LORI-JEAN AND. Turner stated the structural coverage is over the reduced if the deck were reduced. 4225 FOREST LAKE DRIVE, Continued) limit but that the footprint would actually be Gaffron stated Staff did not feel there was a hardship for the variance and that the house was originally constructed to meet the 10 -foot side yard setback. The Planning Commission felt some portion of the deck should be removed and that Staff had recommended more of the deck be removed. White commented the deck is located close to the water. Murphy inquired whether there are conditions on the, I adjoining lot precluding it from being constructed on. Gaffron stated it is unlikely that lot would be built on since all 16 or 17 homeowners would need to agree to the project. White noted that lot also serves as access to the lake for the neighborhood. Murphy suggested exploring the possibility that the lit line be reconfigured somehow to create a better setback situation for the Andersons. I Brokl stated one of the options that could be conside ied is if the Council found that the trade of the variance for the side yard setback is valuable enough to reduce the hardcover in the 0 -75 foot setback, that would justify the approval of the variance and would 'I�constitute a hardship. Brokl stated case law has redefined how a hardship is determined and that the Council needs to make a policy decision on whether the request of the applicant is reasonable or unreasonable. White stated in his opinion that is a valid point and t � at he would be willing to entertain a hardship on that basis. McMillan inquired what size the deck would be reduced to. Gaffron stated if the squared off garage were deck. Anderson stated that is also his understanding and much. McMillan inquired whether the deck at 15 feet woul Anderson stated to his understanding it was at 18 fe Turner stated it was her understanding that at 15 fee required. Anderson stated currently his deck is 33 feet long, f 24 feet, and the next beam would be at 18 feet from the Planning Commission reconunended a 15 -foot they would be opposed to reducing the deck that require additional support beams. it appeared there would not be another beam line where he is proposing to reduce his deck is at e house. PAGE 5 of 20