Laserfiche WebLink
� RECULAR PZEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, DECEMBER 11, 1979 Page 4 <br /> �lan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record CONDITIONAL USE PERP�IT & <br /> the request of Timothy Peterson, 280 Orono nrchard VARIANCE <br /> Road, for a conditional use per�it, dated December 4,280 Orono Orchard Road <br /> 1979 , which states: #500 <br /> Tirlothy Peterson <br /> Attached is a letter from Pir. Peterson' s attorney <br /> listing seven claimed hardships to justif�� variance <br /> to the City' s ordinances. P�ost are variations <br /> of the freedom of speech agrur.ient but f_ail to <br /> address any factual reason that a shorter antenna <br /> or other technology �vould not work equally as well. <br /> None are related in any way to the rec�uired findings <br /> of_ Section 32. 340 regarding harc3shi�s to the land. <br /> �ae have received no other information as of this <br /> date. �Ve have written a letter to the FCC rec�uest- <br /> ing investigation of the interference nrobler,is and <br /> answers to the alternate technology c�uestion. <br /> Letter from Charles J. Newman, P4r. Peterson' s <br /> attorney, dated Decer,lber 1, 1979 - Pages 5 & 6 <br /> Council P4eeting - December 11, 1979 <br /> Present were: P'Ir. Peterson, Mr. Plewrman, and <br /> P'Ir. Jaeger. <br /> P4r. Peterson cor,unented that certified engineering <br /> drawings are being corlpleted and a survey will be <br /> forthcoriing. P4r. Jaeger reviewed his letter <br /> corunenting on Psr. Peterson' s hardships. <br /> Psayor Van Pdest: Orono has performance standards <br /> that sets height limits at 65 feet. <br /> Psr. Jaeger: T9e discussed our topography facts <br /> last week. We are in a hole. <br /> Mayor Van Nest: Your antenna is located in the <br /> hic�hest area in nrono. Orono is not trying to <br /> deny hobby or corunercial uses of your antenna. <br /> Our concerns are safety in a residential zoneo <br /> Our Compehensive Guide Plan denotes this as a <br /> residential area. Neighbors are concerned,Orono <br /> is concerned. Public safety has to be considered. <br /> This is our job to represent the residents. TVithin <br /> a 65' height limitation, you should be able to <br /> operate your hobby. Beyond that, you affect <br /> property values. Diminution in land values has to <br /> be considered. Your operation is not consistent <br /> with surrounding land use. You have not demonstrated <br /> a hardship to justify going beyond the 65' lir�itation. <br /> Again, I say to you, we are not trying to regulate <br /> commercial uses, as long as you are operating accord- <br /> ing to the FCC. (Continued) <br />