Laserfiche WebLink
CONTINUED MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL APRIL 27, 1977 Page 7 <br /> e 1. To have access to land to the north to use CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT <br /> equipment that is stored in a barn in Medina. Vo-Tech Crop Program <br /> �. To farm the land in Medina, as well as the (Continued) <br /> land to the south in Orono. <br /> 3. That there will be no student parking on the <br /> land, on the north or the south. <br /> 4. The reason for the request is to have access <br /> from County Road #6 for agricultural purposes <br /> only. <br /> and also per the Planning Commission recommendations <br /> � of April 18, 1977 and instructed staff to submit <br /> a resolution for Council review May 9, 1977. <br /> Motion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) . <br /> Mrs. Marge Gasch, 1030 Tonkawa Road, stated to MRS. MARGE GASCH MATTER <br /> the Council that she is requesting reimbursement <br /> from the City in the amount of $1,261. 80 for <br /> what I feel to be reasonable for the loss of my <br /> - privacy for my family since the new house at 1020 <br /> Tonkawa Road was not built according to the Orono <br /> City Building Code. The City of Orono was at <br /> fault for the house being built without the <br /> proper setback from the lakeshore. I am requesting <br /> these costs be paid by the City of Orono or I will <br /> take the legal steps necessary to bring to the <br /> �ourt' s attention the illegal way the building <br /> �rmit was issued to 1020 Tonkawa Road and the <br /> setback violation. This has caused a loss of <br /> reasonable privacy and peace of mind for my family. <br /> e The outline statement of costs are: <br /> The variance application fee $30. 00 <br /> • Property owners list 5.00 <br /> Survey 172.00 <br /> Fence lumber 61.52 <br /> Shrubbery 923.28 <br /> Attorney fees 70.00 i <br /> Total $1,261. 80 <br /> Mayor Van Nest informed Mrs. Gasch that he felt <br /> that the City of Orono had acted in good faith <br /> in granting a building permit to Mrs. Parten, 1020 <br /> Tonkawa Road, to construct a new home. The Mayor <br /> � also noted that there was no survey submitted by <br /> Mrs. Gasch to support her argument that the site <br /> line was such that part of this property should <br /> be further to the rear. Mayor Van Nest continued <br /> by informing Mrs. Gasch that the Council felt that <br /> the setback as located was proper. That the City <br /> ertainly had no ability to expend public monies <br /> imply because Mrs. Gasch felt that her property <br /> suffered a diminution of value or that she felt <br /> that she had lost some of her privacy. (Continued) <br />