Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, August 23, 2004 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS — Jim Leslie <br />Leslie indicated that he had no report but would remain for questions. <br />LMCD REPORT — Debora Halvorson <br />The LMCD report was removed as Representative Halvorson was not present. <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />There were none. <br />ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT <br />3. #04 -3029 MICHAEL KEAVENY, 3423/3425 SHORELINE DRIVE — COMMERCIAL <br />SITE PLAN AND VARIANCES — DENIAL RESOLUTION NO. 5218 <br />r , • <br />is <br />Gundlach explained that the applicant had submitted an application for a commercial site plan <br />review in order to conduct improvements to the existing building. She indicated that the Planning <br />Commission voted 7 -0, at their July meeting, to deny the applicant's request due to the proposed <br />new use not being a permitted conditional or accessory use within the B -1 zoning district, and also <br />based on not wanting to allow expansion of the existing non - conforming bowling alley use. <br />Gundlach stated that staff would recommend the Council uphold the Planning Commission is <br />for denial. <br />Keaveny stated that he wished to amend his application, which would eliminate the construction of <br />a new entrance or an expansion of the building, but instead would remodel the interior of the <br />bowling alley utilizing a storage garage within the existing structure for further expansion of the <br />bowling alley. Keaveny stated that these changes to the proposal would eliminate some of the <br />original variance requests and, as he was told when he first approached the City, a remodel could <br />be granted approval more readily. <br />While remodeling would likely be acceptable, Gundlach stated that the remodeling changes Mr. <br />Keaveny mentioned should be submitted in a new application process and would need to be <br />reviewed by the Planning Commission. She was hesitant to comment on the game room, since this <br />use would require an amendment to the existing code. <br />Since the applicant was abandoning his original request, Attorney Barrett suggested that the City <br />Council vote to deny the original application and allow him the opportunity to go back to staff to <br />discuss the remodel submittal. <br />Murphy thanked Mr. Keaveny for his efforts to improve the property; however, suggested he align <br />himself with an attorney who would be able to advise him on what might be appropriate for the <br />neighborhood. Having seen several proposals from Mr. Keaveny in the past, and wanting to <br />support a viable proposal, Murphy wished Mr. Keaveny luck in developing a new plan. <br />Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5218, a Resolution • <br />denying a commercial site plan review for 3423/3425 Shoreline Drive. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0 <br />PAGE 2 of 9 <br />