Laserfiche WebLink
-a <br />_5i'* <br />#■ <br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD JUNE 8, 1992 <br />ZONING FILE #1679 - CONT. <br />I <br />varIance <br />existing <br />^er-the-fact variance for structural <br />mprovemen'ts to a gazebo/bathnouse l ocat ed w i th i n the 0-75’ setbacK <br />Moorse explained that this is a request for a hardcover <br />to construct a 22’x26’ detached garage, replacing an <br />garage. and for an <br />area <br />Qoetten noted that even after the Stop work Order, construcLion <br />continued on the gazebo. She was concerned about precedent setting <br />with this issue and reminded the Council of others with similar <br />app I i cat Ion.:! that had been denied. <br />Miller stated that he had applied for a permit for the garage and <br />durina the process the Inspector noted the work oeing done to the <br />gazebo. He said he was unaware of Orono’s restrictions on <br />hardcover. He added that after the Inspector had asked him to stop <br />work on the structure, very high winds threatened to knock down the <br />structure so some of the siding was added to the structure to <br />prevent this. He said he did not cont <br />stairway. <br />nue work on the decking or <br />Goetten asked Miller if he <br />this need to continue work. <br />ed the Inspector to notify him of <br />Her said he had rot called the City office <br />Qoetten said she was glad that the Council <br />application back to the Planning Commission <br />figures had changed since that review. <br />had <br />as <br />referred the <br />the hardcover <br />Miller explained that he was originally using <br />which was determined to be incorrect. <br />a survey from 1968, <br />for asking for aQoetten pointed v^ut that is the reason <br />coisprehensive review of the entlie property. <br />the lake <br />He had <br />Planning Commission <br />he has a problem with <br />structure is existing, <br />that structure forever. He asked <br />Staff If the applicant would be paying the appropriate after-the- <br />fact fees. <br />Jabbour reviewed that the structure serves as access to <br />and the applicant is entitled to a stairway to the la<e <br />no problem with agreeing with the <br />recommendation on the gazebo. He said <br />people feeling that since a non-conforming <br />they have a right to maintain <br />Mabusth concurred that the additional fees would be charged for the <br />gazebo portion of the projecc.