Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> MINUTES FOR APRIL 19, 1999 <br /> 15. #2469/2470 STEVE AND JO WEBSTER, 500 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD, SKETCH PLAN/ <br /> VARIANCE—(cont.) <br /> that there does appear to be adequate space to back out of the proposed garage and into the <br /> alley. <br /> City Staff could support additional structure on the property based on the fact that the Applicants <br /> are proposing to remove an existing garage which is currently located partially on Dickenson Street. <br /> Staff could support an alignment that would allow for a shorter distance than required between the <br /> new garage and the alley in that City has approved similar requests in the past. However, Staff <br /> is not in support of allowing structures to be located on a property line as proposed by the Applicant. <br /> Lindquist commented that if the alley is vacated, it does allow for more options. Currently the <br /> Applicant is looking at a three foot setback from the alley. <br /> Webster inquired whether the alley can legally be replatted. <br /> Lindquist stated the proper process must be followed for a lot line rearrangement, noting that he <br /> would probably vote to deny the application as presented tonight. <br /> Weinberger commented the Planning Commission could vote on the variances with the understanding <br /> that the alley may be vacated in the future. <br /> Webster stated he did not want the alley to become an obstacle in this proposal. <br /> Mr. Larson indicated he is willing to work with the Websters, noting that he does not feel he should <br /> incur the cost for vacating the alley. <br /> • Smith commented that there are issues to this application that are troublesome and need to be <br /> resolved. <br /> Hawn remarked that the alley issue should really be resolved first. Hawn indicated in her view the <br /> proposed structure is located too close to the alley. <br /> Smith indicated she was in agreement with Hawn. <br /> Stoddard remarked that the Planning Commission would probably look at this application differently <br /> if the alley were replatted. <br /> Berg stated that the Planning Commission can only deal with what is presented tonight. <br /> Gaffron remarked that the alley could be replatted, but the Applicants might incur some expense <br /> if utilities need to be relocated. Gaffron commented that this application is proposing to remove an <br /> existing garage that lies within the right-of-way and relocate it near the alley. If the alley is not <br /> relocated and the Applicants use the alley to back up, it may create some visibility issues. <br /> Webster commented that in 1993, the Planning Commission had passed a variance for the building <br /> which is now located on the City's right-of-way, and this proposal is improving what currently exists. <br /> Berg stated she would like to see some written documentation on that variance before she would <br /> take it into consideration. <br /> Lindquist commented that the way the application is being presented tonight, it will probably be denied <br /> • <br /> Page 18 <br />