Laserfiche WebLink
city o� oR,oNo <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> � NO. 2649 <br /> • � • • <br /> applicant's objectives; and finding that the City Engineer's <br /> recommended modifications to the proposal provide a plan <br /> that is more consistent with past City practices regarding <br /> fill in lakeshore areas , while still providing applicant <br /> with the ability to improve his property by increasing its <br /> maintainability and usefulness. <br /> 7. At the Regular City Council Meeting on June 12 , 1989 , <br /> the City Council voted 5-0 to conceptually cieny the <br /> variances and conditional use permit in their entirety, <br /> finding the proposal not supported by the necessary <br /> hardships and as not being consistent with the City's stated <br /> policies and past practice regarding work in lakeshore <br /> zones. The Orono Council further directed City staff to <br /> draft a resolution of denial. <br /> 8. Until after the application for variances and the <br /> conditional use permit was recommended for only limited <br /> approval by the Flanning Commission, the City had received <br /> no complaints from the neighboring property owner regarding <br /> runoff and water accumulati.on problems on his property. The <br /> accumulation of runoff waters on the adjacent property owned <br /> by Charles Reid at 1400 Baldur Park Road , has not been <br /> demonstrated to place the neighboring residence in jeopardy <br /> of flooding. The adjacent property at 1400 Baldur Park Road <br /> is naturally lower in elevation than the applicant's <br /> property. Construction of the retaining wall and placement <br /> of f i 11 on applicant's property wou ld not necessari ly <br /> eliminate any runoff accumulation problem that may exist. <br /> Such a problem might be more appropriately addressed by <br /> minor additions of fill or site grading on that neighboring <br /> property. � <br /> 9. The proposed retainingwall and fill will have a visual <br /> impact from the Lake, and the propcsed location of the <br /> retaining wall abutting the lot line would not allow for <br /> appropriate screening �,�ithin applicant's property. <br /> 10. The land alterations proposed to be conducted within <br /> the lakeshore protected area (0-75' from the lakeshore) are <br /> found to be in conf lict with the fol lowing principles ana <br /> goals set forth in Orono's Commur,ity Management Plan: <br /> Page 3 of 7 <br />