Laserfiche WebLink
<<«<>■. r. I .';w'v:''•:fe/tfe" <br />W- <br />t <br />■•:’ i"..-.i <br />'■•I ’■' ■ <br />Wm::r <br />‘pM:'.W: <br />■'■T- >, <br />i-a'. <br />•Vt <br />■ <br />Sp’> <br />'IS' <br />%ii': <br />prt <br />?^Sr <br />mp- - <br />liiil <br />rsstff- Sim* <br />el-K'Ste <br />Pp-!#*' S'.. <br />ax'^' <br />|5 <br />yK-g.: <br />,:i <br />;l|7" <br />Px-mmx <br />X- ■''< <br />■y, <br />.■ ::> <br />. w r <br />if ',' <br />mII" <br />m <br />f#a- <br />i'- <br />MINUTES OF THE REGUl.AR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD FEBRUARY 24, 1992 <br />ZONING FILE #1682 - CONT. <br />Callartan 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 ' xcuse for not getting a <br />permit. He asked If the Council would lave 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 discussed, 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 Counci I 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 />Qaffron stated that the resolution allows underpinning of the slab <br />to move the westerly walI, 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 />Callahan noted that the Planning Commission suggested that removal <br />at the first review of this application.