Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,April 18,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3103 Jack and Kari Olson,Continued) <br /> Mrs. Olson stated they have looked at a number of different options but most are cost prohibitive. <br /> Fritzler noted that there is some land adjoining this lot which is not their property and that the applicants <br /> technically should not be using that land. <br /> Gaffron stated it is a county right-of-way and that the county in the past has allowed property owners to <br /> use it as driveway access. <br /> Jurgens stated the county still has rights to that land and could possibly have some objection to <br /> constructing a garage in that area. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the applicants would like their application tabled. <br /> Bremer pointed out the applicants could argue their case before the Council if they have no intention to <br /> revise their plans. <br /> Mr. Olson stated he is not financially able to remodel the residence in order to construct a garage. <br /> Leslie stated the applicant could submit a different design if this application is tabled and not pay a new <br /> application fee. <br /> Winkey stated the council also has the option to table it and allow the applicants to redesign their plans <br /> and send it back to the Planning Commission. <br /> Mr. Olson requested the Planning Commission vote on his application. <br /> Rahn moved,Jurgens seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3103,Jack and Kari <br /> Olson, 1966 Shadywood Road, subject to a redesign that would allow the maximum structural <br /> coverage of 1500 square foot and the associated minimal hardcover allowed,and further subject to <br /> no further encroachments into the side setbacks. <br /> Gaffron inquired whether this application should appear before the Planning Commission again if the <br /> plans are revised. <br /> Winkey inquired whether the application should be denied. <br /> Rahn stated his issue with this application is the amount of structural coverage being proposed. <br /> VOTE: Ayes 2,Nays 5; Fritzler,Kempf,Bremer,Leslie and Winkey opposed. MOTION <br /> FAILED. <br /> PAGE 24 <br />