Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 <br />ZONING FILE #1682 - CONT. <br />Callahan asked how the trusses got there in the first place. <br />Mertz noted Brickley ordered them ahead of time, and due to a mis- <br />interpretation of the Planning Commission action, went ahead with <br />the project. He agreed there was no excuse for not getting a <br />permit. He asked if the Council would have agreed to the proposal <br />if Brickley had required the removal of the ugly sheds to be <br />replaced with a new garage in the correct sequence. <br />Jabbour stated that he did not believe there was such a thing as <br />ugly buildings. He stated the issue Is excessive hardcover and <br />structural encroachment. <br />Mayor Peterson asked Barrett if the past decision could be,changed. <br />Barrett stated that they did have the authority to change their <br />past decision, but a motion would have to be*made by a person who <br />voted for the prevailing side. <br />Mayor Peterson reiterated that Brickley did not stay through the <br />motion at the last Council meeting when this - was d1scussed,..and <br />noted she did not mention tabling the application at that meeting. <br />Brickley stated that she had everything written out and that was <br />the first sentence. <br />Jabbour felt.that all issues regarding this application have been <br />a misunderstanding. He noted that the project was not done in the <br />proper sequence, and felt that Council has tried'to work with the <br />applicant. He reminded her that they are not in the business of <br />redesigning her lifestyle, buildings or land, and that is why the <br />Issue was voted on at the last meeting. <br />Gaffron stated that the resolution allows underpinning of the slab <br />to move the westerly wall, but to allow the excess slab to remain. <br />Mertz announced that Brickley would agree to removal of the <br />southern excess portion of the slab if the garage was allowed to <br />remain in its present location. <br />s <br />Callahan noted that the Planning Commission suggested that removal <br />at the first review of this application. <br />5 <br />