My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-08-1997 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
12-08-1997 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/28/2012 4:06:42 PM
Creation date
12/28/2012 4:06:42 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 8, 1997 <br />( #5 - #2264 Janet Kiernan - Continued) <br />Gaffron said there is no question that the building inspector approved all of the steps <br />taken and approved them because from a building code standpoint, the substandard <br />portions could not be part of the new house. He said the project possibly could have <br />been stopped earlier. <br />Dzurik asked if it has any bearing that he had asked the inspector whether the removals <br />would cause any problems and was told it would not. <br />City Attorney Barrett said he is comfortable with telling the Council that they can <br />enforce the conditions of the resolution as far as the building code has to be protected. <br />As a question of law, the City has the right to enforce the findings. <br />Jabbour asked Council for direction. <br />Goetten noted the unfortunate situation. She said she is generally steadfast in such <br />situations. Goetten said the applicant was put on notice when she applied for the <br />variance that she had to comply with conditions of the resolution. She understood the <br />applicant has been above board with the City but does not believe there is a win -win <br />situation. Goetten felt the application should be reviewed again by the Planning <br />Commission and the structure pulled back behind the 75' setback line. <br />Jabbour asked Gaffron to show the site plan and the 75' setback Iine and house location. <br />Kelley clarified that there were two variances required plus hardcover. Gaffron said the <br />project is over the 25% hardcover allowed. Parts of the structure, terrace, and steps are <br />located in the 0 -75' setback. There is also need for an average lakeshore setback <br />variance but that is not an issue. <br />Jabbour asked if the structure could be moved to the north. Gaffron noted the location of <br />trees to the north. Tom Kellogg said the sewer line comes in from the driveway, <br />showing the location in the northwest corner, so this would not impact any construction. <br />Dzurik informed Kiernan that her sewer line was in place. <br />Gaffron asked if any construction under the current approval would be allowed in the 0- <br />75' setback. Goetten asked how far into the 0 -75' setback any construction occurs. <br />Gaffron said it was 6 -8'. Jabbour asked if Council would support the plan if the structure <br />was pulled out of the 0 -75' zone. Kelley suggested he would support the structure if <br />pulled back behind the 75' setback and to the north to meet the side setback requirement. <br />Goetten said she was concerned more with the 0 -75' setback. <br />is <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.