My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-11-1989 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting
Orono
>
City Council
>
1989
>
09-11-1989 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/12/2026 10:57:02 AM
Creation date
7/28/2025 11:51:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Administration
Admin Doc Type
Agenda Packet City Council
Section
City Council
Subject
regular meeting
Document Date
9/11/1989
Retention Effective Date
7/28/2025
Retention
Permanent After File Date
Protection
Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
447
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION METING AUGUST 21, 1989 <br />ZONING FILE #1438-PILISBURY CONTINUED <br />There were no comments from the public regarding this matter <br />and the public hearing was closed. <br />It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning <br />Commissioner Johnson, to recommend approval of application #1438, <br />for a 6" height variance for a serpentine brick wall. Motion, <br />Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. <br />#1439 LAWRMM E. LANGHANS <br />1366 REST POINT ROAD <br />AFTER -THE -PACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE <br />PUBLIC HEARING 8:50 P.M. TO 8:53 P.M. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were <br />duly noted. <br />The applicant was present for this public hearing. <br />Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron informed <br />the Planning Commission that the applicant was seeking after -the - <br />fact approval for a deck and retaining walls in the 0-75' setback <br />zone. Gaffron said that at one time there was a boathouse, but <br />in the 1987 storms the boathouse was damaged beyond repair. The <br />applicant removed the damaged structure, but left a portion of <br />the concrete walls to act as a retaining wall for the bank. Mr. <br />Langhans then built a deck using the pre-existing foundation as <br />partial footing. The applicant is also constructing another <br />section of retaining wall adjacent to the deck. He said that it <br />was staff's recommendation that the foundation should remain <br />because it is helping to stabilize the bank. Staff also believes <br />that the retaining walls are also necessary. Gaffron noted that <br />there were several letters supporting this application. <br />There were no comments from the public regarding this matter <br />and the public hearing was closed. <br />Planning Commissioner Johnson stated that if this <br />application were not after -the -fact, the Planning Commission <br />would not have recommended approval to build the retaining walls. <br />He felt that they were now forced to act and that Mr. Lapghans <br />should have been aware of the City's codes and ordinances due to <br />his profession as a realtor. <br />Mr. Langhans explained that : had done what was necessary <br />to prevent further erosion. Johnson noted that the City was <br />issuing emergency permits for bank stabilization after the July, <br />1987 storm. Mr. Langhans also mentioned that he had reduced <br />hardcover. <br />Gaffron said that removing the concrete wall would provide <br />support for the '•ank for quite some time. It the wall were <br />removed ani' an ,npt made to reconstruct another wall, the <br />support would be .." ned. Gaffron said that in the past it has <br />been the City's F,:. y to allow the foundation to remain and fill <br />in around it. Gal' in said however, in this case, any fill may <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.