10-11-2004 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 11, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. ( #04 -3048 Steven and Kathleen Persian, Continued) • Persian stated his goal is to have the Council support the recommendation of the Planning Commission and that his next step would be to turn over his plans to the architecture committee of the homeowners association. Persian stated he has some concerns over the lack of consistency of this particular committee being in place but that is an issue for the homeowners association to deal with. Sansevere inquired whether the location suggested by Council Member McMillan would work on this property. Persian stated the location suggested would need to be accessed through approximately 150 trees. Sansevere stated he has seen the property and that the proposed location of the structure does not appear to be a front yard. Sansevere stated he would be willing to go along with what Counsel Barrett has suggested. Persian stated it is their goal and intention to meet the architecture committee's recommendation. Sansevere inquired whether the applicant would be opposed to tabling this to allow him time to meet with the committee. Persian indicated he is not opposed to tabling this, but that he would prefer to go forward with the recommendation of the City Attorney. White stated he would like to see the plans prior to approval since the size of the structure has changed • dramatically. Murphy stated given the changes to the proposed structure and the covenants of the homeowners association, he would prefer proceeding with Mr. Barrett's suggestion as well as give the architectural committee an opportunity to look at the proposed structure. McMillan inquired about alternate sites. Sansevere stated he does not have a problem with the proposed location based upon his review of the lot. Sansevere stated he is in favor of Mr. Barrett's suggestion, with approval being contingent upon the applicant providing an opinion letter. Sansevere noted the applicant has indicated he is willing to meet with the architecture committee. Murphy inquired what the size of the new building would be. Gundlach stated the new building is proposed to be 30 by 40. Murphy inquired what the setbacks would be. Gundlach stated originally with the larger structure they would have been 40 feet from the edge of the undeveloped right -of -way, which is 30 feet wide, but with the size of the building being reduced, they would be at least 44 feet from the edge of the undeveloped right -of -way and would be able to meet the • PAGE 12