My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-08-1987 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
1987
>
06-08-1987 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/21/2012 4:06:30 PM
Creation date
8/21/2012 4:06:30 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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 JUNE 8, 1987 <br />41112/ #1142 SMITH SAY MARINA CONTINUED <br />Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that twelve of the 16 <br />property owners receiving the questionnaires responded <br />as follows: <br />Approve of winter boat storage - 8 <br />Disapprove of winter boat storage - 4 <br />Of the four most affected.property owners: 2 <br />approved of winter boat storage and 2 disapproved <br />of winter boat storage. <br />Mr. Love stated that they planned to talk to the <br />property owners who disapprove of the winter boat <br />storage; and asked Council to proceed with the <br />applications before them and review the parking lot <br />proposal at the next meeting. <br />George Rovegno, 2010 Shoreline Drive, stated that he <br />felt the applicant's would do a responsible job on this <br />project, however he was concerned with the commercial <br />growth in a residential area. He noted that opaque <br />screening is required by code at the 1955 Shoreline <br />Drive site. He felt that the Spates Ave. access should <br />be closed because it is a residential street and County <br />Rd. 15 should be utilized for this commercial use. He <br />felt there should be some form of 24 hour security. He <br />asked where a crosswalk would be located. Mr. Rovegno <br />also contends that the gas station becoming a sailboat <br />shop, as well as the proposed adjacent parking lot, is a <br />use variance. <br />Regarding the use variance issue, City Attorney Blatz <br />stated that if it is determined that the change in use <br />would be deemed a use variance the code would have to be <br />amended or some changes made, the City cannot legally <br />grant use variances. <br />Regarding the crosswalk location, this must be <br />determined by the City Engineer. <br />Regarding 24 hour security, Mr. Love stated that they <br />are willing to do what the City recommends and allows <br />them to do. He noted that their original application <br />included a caretaker unit but have since omitted that <br />portion because it is not an approved use. <br />City Administrator Bernhardson recommended that this <br />be addressed as a separate issue. <br />Mr. Rovegno stated there should be some type of security <br />to the entrances and accessing the property. <br />►0 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.