11-08-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.ni. (7. #04-3048 STEVEN AND KATHLEN PERSIAN, 1005 HUNT FARM ROAD, Continued) building, or, an acceptance letter from the home owmcr’s association would be acceptable in place of the attorney's opinion’. Steve Persian stated that he had delivered all of the necessary information to the home owner’s association architectural committee and distributed a survey among the homeowners in a timely fashion; however, had not received an opinion at this time. Sansevere asked if the Council could move forward subject to the letter from the homeowner’s association or attorney. Gaffron stated this could be handled at the staff level. Dave Wilson, of the homeowner’s association, indicated that they had not had adequate time to review the application over the past 1-2 weeks and would need time to evaluate the request. Although the association could continue its current line of action. Attorney Barrett stated that if the homeowners association did no^ concur with the request, the applicant could get an attorney to review the request and the association by-law s. Persian pointed out that the application process had already taken 7 months, noting that the Orono building application signage had been posted for over 7 weeks. He cid not feel the Council should intervene in the association covenants, but wished to have this portion of the application approved. Wilson stated that the by-laws allow the association 30 days to review the application and requested that the City Council allow the association to complete its process before adopting its resolution. Sanse\ ere interjected that he did not feel the applicant w as trying to supercede any association review; however, would prefer fewer delays. Persian stated that he had not asked any attorneys for their opinions on the matter and reiterated that he has attempted to be very timely in his deliveries. Barrett suggested that the City Council adopt its resolution, while the association is free to continue its evaluation process with or without City involvement. Sansevere moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5238, a Resolution granting a variance to allow an accessory building to be located closer to the street or front lot line than the principal structure for 1005 Hunt Farm Road. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1 - Mayor Peterson dissenting. Mayor Peterson acknow ledged that more time might ha%e been suitable. McMillan stated that she was mure comfortable w ith application w ith the addition of the new wording. PAGE 5 of to