Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, December 8, 2014 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />Page 11 of 26  <br />  <br />(11. #14-3697 GARY AND JOAN MARQUARDT, 2617 CASCO POINT ROAD – VARIANCES, <br />Continued) <br /> <br />Greene reiterated that the house not only needs a deck, but is crying for a deck, and believes the variance <br />is minor compared to the need for a deck on this house. <br /> <br />Levang stated she has not changed her mind since the last meeting and that she agrees with Staff’s <br />recommendation for the second-story addition, with a small landing off the front and stairway down to the <br />lake, which is Option B. <br /> <br />McMillan noted the Council is also talking about structural coverage and whether the deck will become <br />enclosed at some point in time, which is important to consider. McMillan stated whenever the Council <br />grants a structural coverage variance; it is for something that is very essential, such as a garage. <br />McMillan stated the general feeling has been that the use of a home is reasonable even without a deck. <br />McMillan indicated she also would be in favor of Option B <br /> <br />Bremer indicated she is in favor of Option A. <br /> <br />Printup stated two weeks ago he made comments regarding hardcover and how the City has changed the <br />rules to allow more hardcover. Printup stated with this application, he is happy to see the hardcover <br />reduced, but if you go with the black and white on the practical difficulty, it does not meet that standard. <br />Printup stated there have been compelling arguments made for the deck, but that the City’s Code says <br />otherwise, which is what he is struggling with. Printup stated he is not sure if the applicants are willing or <br />able to reduce the deck any further, but that he does not see a practical difficulty for the deck. <br /> <br />Cornick stated he has not visited the property and does not have enough information at this point to <br />comment on the application. <br /> <br />Marquardt stated in terms of wrestling with should we or shouldn’t we, the Council should ask <br />themselves what price will be paid for allowing this. Marquardt stated he understands that terms get <br />made up in laws to cover the bases, such as the term massing. Marquardt stated he has a hard time <br />understanding how a deck creates a lot of mass and that he understands the concept of hardcover but it is <br />rather nebulous when you look at the spirit and intent of the law. Marquardt asked what the price paid <br />would be if the City were to say yes to this. <br /> <br />Printup stated he wants to error on the side of the homeowner, and if you go back to the phrase of whether <br />it is a need or a want, the ordinance says it is a want and that it will become a question of what the next <br />homeowner will desire. Printup indicated he lives on a very small lot and that there is a lot he would like, <br />which gets into the position of what integrity the City Council will have in going through the variance <br />process. <br /> <br />Marquardt stated the shape and size of this lot is a hardship, and that if someone else has a similar <br />situation, he would not be opposed to it. Marquardt stated to his understanding the City’s Code provides <br />a baseline that the City Council needs to use when it makes a decision based on the different <br />circumstances. Marquardt stated the City Council gets to decide what they are allowed to do with their <br />property and he is trying to understand what the rationality is for the City saying no.