11-27-1979 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RFGULAR PIEETIPdG OF THE ORONO COUPJCTL, NOVEP4BFR ?.7, 1979 Paqe 6 in support of his application as rec�uested in CONDTmIONAL USE PERPIIT writing by the City on September 27 , 1979. On VARIArdCE October 16, 1979 , the Council tabled the iter.l 280 Orono Orchard Road until the November 13 , 1979 rmeeting (one month (Continued) delay) and notice was given to Mr. Peterson in writing. The applicant failed to provide the information by the agenda deadline and it did not appear on the November 13, 1979 ac7enda. On iJovember 8, 1979, a letter was written to P'lr. Newman (cc: Peterson) stating the new deadline and that review would be either b� the Planning Cormmission on November 26 , 1979 or, more likely, by the Council on Pdovember 27, 1979 . Thus , the applicant had 19 days notice of the November 27, 1979 Council raeetinq and two month' s tirie to prepare the requested information and his presentation. P�r. Jaeger commented that Mr. Peterson felt that the City was unfair in issuing caarrents against � him. Mr. Jaeger also stated that Mr. Peterson uses his radio as a hobby and has spent up to $50, 000 on it and also corununicates world-wide, that P�Ir. Peterson rents the property with an option to purchase it, and is out of town on business and will not be able to attend a Council meeting until Januar��, 1980. Councilmember Paurus: "�ahy did thi� st�uctur_e cro un without a permit?" rsr. Jaeger: "I don't know. ��Jhat you see is a temporary structure. " iir. Jaeger stated that Orono' s statutes were vaque and unconstitutional and infrinqe on personal rights of Mr. Peterson. The request for an inspection of his property is an invasion of privacy. r4r. Jaeger questioned the �urisdiction of_ the building code and was advised of the State code and Orono' s history of code adoption, including adoption of the current edition. Mr. Bernard Fdstrom, 190 Orono Orchard Road, stated that he was concerned about the foundation for the antenna, if it had been installed properl��, that there were no guy wires and that if there had been no �ermit, there were no insnections and no structural review for strenc�th and overturninq forces. He was worried about children climbinc� the tower and falling of�. He had been at the Planning Commission r.teeting and was concerned that the tower was beinc� used for business purposes. He c�uestioned �ahether � a State electrical permit had been obtained for the wiring done, including the motor he sees on tor� of the tower. He says the tower failed on�e this suru*ier, which should be adequate nroof that the design is �nsurficient. Fie says a P4innesota rnc?ineer should certify the design. (Continued)