My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-13-1984 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1984
>
11-13-1984 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/30/2025 1:18:35 PM
Creation date
10/30/2025 1:12:01 PM
Metadata
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.
/
232
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
mimwrBs OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29, 1984. PAGE l5 <br />#820 Fisk (cunt) Grabe& st:att.-d that the lot would look better with a <br />house on it because of the dumpy appearan-e of the lot. <br />Councilmember Grabek asked chat the motion be read <br />again. <br />Mayor. Rutler moved, Councilmember Adams"s:.!conded, to <br />request staff to draft a resolution of denial 'based upon <br />the following findings: <br />1. The Property can be put to a reasonable allowed use, <br />pvck use or combination with adjacent property. <br />There is ar, Outstanding offer to purchase the <br />property. <br />2. The proposeA variance is c.�ntrary to the leper anJ <br />intent of the Orono Comprehensive Dian. <br />3. The development and/or granting of the variance <br />would set an adverse precedent in the City. <br />4. The applican t/purcharser should have -iar] k�n:�iedge <br />of the zoning code requirements prior to the <br />purchase. Any hardship would seem to be self- <br />imposed. <br />5. There is only a 1/2 sewer unit charge against the <br />property indicating a question on the part of the <br />City at some time that tti, lot is substandard. <br />h. ':hece is no lateral sewer assessment levied against <br />the property indicating ir_s substandard status. <br />7. The pcope-ty fails short of the zoning stand.-jr,is to <br />�n extent too great- t,, enable just. i f ic,it ion of <br />-1ranting the variances requesteli. <br />fi. The property does not ,_onfurm to the development <br />pat te>r:, the neighborhood. <br />More discussion eras held before the vote was taken on <br />the motion. <br />Councilmember Grabek stated that he didn't think that <br />the finding "that the property could be pi.it to another <br />use" should not concern the Council. �;rabek stated <br />that the purchase of the lot, the Counci 1 should net oe <br />involved with or whether or not there is an offer )c nut. <br />;;r.ibok statPA that this should not be d prece9ent issue. <br />Mayor 3utler stated that to ycont this i:itianc:e would <br />indeed establ ish a negat i ve precedent i ._y w i thin tiie <br />city. 4utler sL,ited that t,ot j .itt'llf) *'yls <br />neighb-.)rhood but within the r_ntire <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.