10-25-2004 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. (5.#04-3007 HAROLD AND MILDRED BOWER, 1925 LAKEVIEW TERRACE, • Continued) Murphy questioned how this would impact the future development of the lot or whether a covenant could be attached to the sale. Attorney Barrett stated that the Resolution would be filed with the deed for the land. 6. #04 -3024 ZONING AMENDMENT — PERMIT FOR LARGE VEHICLES McMillan complimented staff and the Planning Commission for coming up with a solution to this problem. Gaffron read item `g', a condition added to Zoning Section 78 -1577 and its accompanying requirements as the proposed amendment and asked for comment. Mrs. Timm asked for further explanation of item `f requiring that, in a shared driveway situation, an agreement be signed by all current driveway users be placed on file with the City. Sansevere questioned why an additional agreement would be required of users, since an agreement for easements already exists. He suggested that item `f be removed. Gaffron questioned whether an additional agreement granting this use was necessary. Attorney Barrett stated that the City should avoid, as it has attempted to do in this amendment, is taking sides on private land use issues. He voiced concern regarding City involvement, where there is an easement, and cautioned the City of including item 'f. He stated that, in situations where shared driveways would otherwise allow access, the easement agreement should remain as it is, and the burden to prove otherwise would be upon the other applicant. Sansevere maintained that a resident in a shared driveway situation should be allowed to use the driveway, period. There have never been conditions put upon the easement when people have set up shared driveway agreements in the past. Murphy moved, White seconded, to direct staff to bring Zoning Code Amendment Section 78 -1577 (C)2a — Large Vehicle Storage Permit — Ordinance No. back for formal approval on November 8, 2004, revising item 'f' to reflect a demonstration that a shared driveway agreement exists. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 7. #04 -3048 STEVEN AND KATHLEN PERSIAN, 1005 HUNT FARM ROAD — VARIANCES — RESOLUTION NO. 5238 Gaffron reported that, while the applicant had revised his proposal to limit the building to the allowed 1,200 s.f. area, he still requests the variance to locate the building closer to the street or front lot line than the principal residence. Gaffron noted that staff would recommend adoption of the resolution which documents the original and revised proposals, and approves the proposed variance. He pointed out that addition on page 3 of 6 of the resolution under item #2, which denotes `Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant must submit an opinion letter from his attorney on whether the property owner has the legal right to construct the proposed accessory • PAGE 4 of 10