My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packet Cc - regular meeting 8/8/1988
Orono
>
City Council
>
1988
>
Agenda Packet Cc - regular meeting 8/8/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2025 10:14:49 AM
Creation date
9/15/2025 9:36:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Administration
Admin Doc Type
Agenda Packet CC
Section
City Council
Subject
regular meeting
Document Date
8/8/1988
Retention Effective Date
9/15/2025
Retention
Permanent After File Date
Protection
Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
180
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 REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 11, 1988 <br />Mayor Grabek suggested that more research be done on the 0'-75' so <br />that there will be no loopholes. Motion made that item #1296 be <br />tabled until appropriate wording can he establ' hed to state a <br />denial to protect the intent of the City Code and Ordinances. <br />Callahan interjected that it is clear that they can and must deny <br />the lot area application. It seems to him that the Council could <br />conceptually turn down the accessory dock on the property leaving <br />It to the City Attorney to further advise the Council as to <br />whether or not they would be prohibited from doing such a thing, <br />even if they wanted to. He suggests that in light of fact that he <br />is not in favor of issue, that the matter be denied rather than <br />tabled. Mayor Grabek: said he had no problem with th_s but wanted <br />to find out if the :additional time for research was needed by <br />counsel. Attorney Barrett stated that he could not give a <br />conclusion at the moment, but wouldn't advise that there is a <br />difficulty with denying the lot area application upon the staff's <br />recommendations or the point disussed at tonight's meeting. <br />Callahan stated that because they do not have a specific <br />resolution here, either on the basis of the Planning Commission's <br />recommendation or otherwise, the staff is suggesting that the <br />Council give them conceptual direction. The Mayor said he had no <br />problem with that and withdrew his motion. It was moved by <br />Councilmember CaLlahan, seconded by Mayor Grabek that Council deny <br />the lot area application of Rick Stodola and Merrit Peterson and <br />deny application for an accessory dock on the basis -f the <br />Planning Commission's3 recommendation and findings and that Council <br />direct the staff tc prepare a resolution enbodying those concepts <br />and request that --he City Attorney advise the Council. as to the <br />status of the use. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, motion passed. <br />#1299 NANCY HIGGINS <br />3017 NORTH SHORE DRIVE <br />CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT <br />RESOLUTION #2468 <br />Applicant Higgins was present. <br />City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this is a request <br />for a Conditional Use Permit on a property that currently has a <br />principal structure, a guest house and a caretaker structure. At <br />one time these were two separate lots. The applicant seeks a <br />Conditional Use Permit issued in advance of removal and new <br />construction of the principal structure. The guest house does net <br />have heating and cooling and is being used as a guest horse only. <br />The one issue, and the staff recommends that the propcsed <br />resolution be amended to include putting the applicant. of notice <br />there is a screened porch in the 0-75 and language should be <br />included that applicant cannot r:!pair or replace that structure. <br />The Mayor asked for any comments from the applicant. Applicant <br />indicated that. they are going to put the house further to the <br />east, as suggested, in a someone wants to subdivide in the <br />future, they will then have one acre. The Mayor asked about <br />subdivision. Zoning Administrator explained that applicant <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.