Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 8, 2012 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> Page 8 of 21 <br /> <br />(8. #12-3575 SCOTT AND MELISSA MUSGJERD, 4156 HIGHWOOD ROAD, Continued) <br /> <br />2. Approval of a side, street setback variance to allow the proposed deck to be set back 5 feet <br /> from the west side street lot line; <br /> <br />3. Approval of lot width and lot area variances. <br /> <br />Planning Staff recommends approval of the requested lot width and lot area variances. Staff recommends <br />approval of a side street setback ranging from 7.6 feet to 10 feet from the west lot line where a 35-foot <br />side street setback is required. This is justified based on the minimum width garage proposed and the <br />narrowness of the lot. However, Staff continues to recommend that the deck be redesigned to meet a 10- <br />foot setback from the alley lot line rather than the 3.5 to 4-foot setback proposed or the 5-foot setback <br />recommended by the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Curtis noted the applicants have provided a revised survey and plans. Staff has not had an opportunity to <br />review the plans in detail but expects all engineering issues to be addressed prior to drafting a resolution. <br />McMillan asked what size the deck would be if it was reduced down to meet a 10-foot setback. <br /> <br />Rahn stated it appears to be 5.5 feet. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated there would be more width at the lake end but at the top of the deck there would be 5 to <br />5.5 feet. Curtis stated the applicants can speak to the reasons for the proposed design. <br /> <br />Rahn stated his personal belief is that these homes that are next to fire lanes have a tendency to encroach <br />into the fire lane, and to allow a brand new home to encroach is not the right path to go down. Rahn <br />stated in his view the fire lanes are underutilized throughout the City and that the four borders for each <br />fire lane should be identified. Rahn commented it could be that the City ends up receiving complaints <br />from the property owner if people are down at the beach and they have a deck that is close to that area. <br />Rahn stated he is in agreement with Staff and sees no reason for the deck to encroach. <br /> <br />Michael Sharratt, Designer, stated they started with a very nonconforming situation with a home that is <br />located 2.5 feet from the east property and a garage that is 0 feet from the side alley line. Sharratt <br />commented he is saddened that applicants are seldom congratulated for doing a good job, which is what <br />has been done here. The applicants are asking for the side yard setback to accommodate the deck. The <br />deck has been cantilevered so it will not touch the ground. The reason for the variance request is that <br />without it, the deck would end up being seven feet wide, which basically does not allow for a table and <br />chairs. <br /> <br />Sharratt indicated they do have an option to place the deck in front of the great room windows on the first <br />floor, but that when you have a lot that is roughly 40 feet above the lake, you would not be able to see the <br />shoreline if you were sitting on the deck. The applicants have small children and would like to be able to <br />see the shoreline and yard, which is the reason the deck was located on the side of the house. Sharratt <br />stated they felt that a cantilevered structure would be an acceptable encroachment given all the other <br />nonconformities that have been resolved. Sharratt noted they are under the 25 percent hardcover limit <br />and under the structural coverage limit. The plan also exceeds the street setback and meets the east side <br />setback. Sharratt noted the home is only 23’/6” wide and that their setback variance seems like a <br />reasonable request. <br /> <br /> <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda - 10/22/2012 <br />Approval of Council Minutes 10/08/2012 [Page 8 of 21]