Laserfiche WebLink
0 <br />MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, September 12, 2011 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(10. #11 -3521 TAMIHELMER, 3131 CASCO CIRCLE, Continued) <br />Mattick stated he would encourage the City Council to review the revised plans before to voting on them. <br />Sharratt asked whether the modification to create dormers on the lake side would be something they <br />would be allowed or whether it would need to be changed. <br />Curtis displayed a drawing of the dormers looking east. <br />Sharratt pointed out the dormers on the overhead. The dormer that is visible goes across and would <br />include some skylights. <br />Rahn stated from a side view it appears to be up near the ridge of the house. <br />Sharratt indicated that is correct. <br />Rahn stated in his view there should be no encroachment in front of the average lakeshore setback except <br />for maybe a very minor encroachment. <br />McMillan commented she is not sure whether the dormers would have as much impact as the deck on the <br />sight line. <br />• Printup asked whether the guidance is needed to redraw the plans. <br />Franchot noted it would cost the applicant money to redraw the plans. Franchot indicated the dormers are <br />not a problem for him. <br />McMillan commented it is difficult to visualize a change without a drawing. <br />Curtis pointed out the line for the chimney. <br />Sharratt stated that chimney would be removed. <br />Franchot asked whether the applicant would like to table the application. <br />Sharratt indicated he would. <br />Franchot asked whether Council Members Rahn and Printup could give the applicant some sense on <br />whether there is zero tolerance or whether they would allow some minor encroachment into the average <br />lakeshore setback. Franchot stated the next question would then be what would be considered minor. <br />Rahn stated if the applicant is going to encroach, they will need to show practical difficulty. Rahn stated <br />they could have a dormer up to the average lakeshore setback line without a variance. <br />Sharratt stated the practical difficulty is that the existing skylight is within the existing timber frame of the <br />house and that it is already beyond that line. They are attempting to match the roof pitches that exist on <br />• the house. <br />Page 23 of 28 <br />