Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, September 12, 2011 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />  Page 23 of 28   <br />   <br />(10. #11-3521 TAMI HELMER, 3131 CASCO CIRCLE, Continued) <br /> <br />Mattick stated he would encourage the City Council to review the revised plans before to voting on them. <br /> <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 /> <br />Curtis displayed a drawing of the dormers looking east. <br /> <br />Sharratt pointed out the dormers on the overhead. The dormer that is visible goes across and would <br />include some skylights. <br /> <br />Rahn stated from a side view it appears to be up near the ridge of the house. <br /> <br />Sharratt indicated that is correct. <br /> <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 /> <br />McMillan commented she is not sure whether the dormers would have as much impact as the deck on the <br />sight line. <br /> <br />Printup asked whether the guidance is needed to redraw the plans. <br /> <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 /> <br />McMillan commented it is difficult to visualize a change without a drawing. <br /> <br />Curtis pointed out the line for the chimney. <br /> <br />Sharratt stated that chimney would be removed. <br /> <br />Franchot asked whether the applicant would like to table the application. <br /> <br />Sharratt indicated he would. <br /> <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 /> <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 /> <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 /> <br /> <br />Item #03 - CC Agenda - 09/26/2011 <br />Approval of Council Minutes 09/12/2011 <br />[Page 23 of 28]