Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />Landmark Drive, Orono, reported that he lives on Stubbs Bay Casev <br />IS installing np rap on his shoreline and is in the process of adding a beach vrith^he <br />ap^oval of the Watershed District. He said he learned that he nLded a condUional use <br />hfr^ ^ lakeshore. The contractors have been <br />^red, and the need to go through the CUP process will affect the time frame He asked <br />for approval now to move the dirt and obtain an after-the-fact CUP. <br />Jabbour informed Casey that it is not within the Council's power to grant approval <br />laSo”"”""*'0“ “ «sul,i*„g ai.:Sf ,he <br />G^n 8^“' «<<ininislrative approvalGaffron said he would submit a memo regarding such code changes. <br />t^f^urina riprapping; yet. he finds it hard to believe <br />requested ^ ‘’®^“*red, the Council should be able to grant such approval as that being <br />ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT <br />(#3) #2295 CONLEY BROOKS, 980 WEST FERNDALE ROAD - VARIANCES - <br />REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION <br />Conley Brooks was present. <br />Gaffron reported that Mr. Brooks is requesting reconsideration of a variance approval <br />Tu ®*I 13 for a storage garage. The property is located on West Femdale Road <br />the 12x15 garage received approval for location within the front street yard, but was <br />^ ^ ^ • The residence is located further to the east. The garage would meet <br />the 26 wetland setback and be located T from the street. The applicant originally <br />® ’’'“"''8 Commission recommended approval of a <br />18x24 garage. The applicant is asking approval of a I6'x22'garage. A diagram of the <br />Structure was provided. <br />G^on sad the appUcant believes a 12’x 15' stnicture is too small to be functional. He <br />indicated it would require a 4/5th vote in order for reconsideration of the application. <br />Barrett said the Council can discuss the merits of the request and then take action or refer <br />the application back to the Planning Commission. <br />Jabbour noted that a motion from a Council member, who voted with the majority on the <br />initial action, is required to open the application for reconsideration.