My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-11-1991 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
1991
>
02-11-1991 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/30/2019 8:25:42 AM
Creation date
4/30/2019 8:25:40 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 11, 1991 <br />OTHER - SWIMMING POOL /PLASTIC HARDCOVER CONTINUED <br />It was the consensus of Council that appropriate measures be <br />taken at this time. <br />It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to <br />conceptually adopt a policy stating that the water surface area <br />of swimming pools will be considered hardcover, and that any <br />landscape plastic existing within the 0 -75' setback area is there <br />illegally and should be removed. Landscape plastic will no <br />longer be accepted as tradeable "existing hardcover" when <br />considering zoning applications requesting additional structural <br />hardcover. Staff is directed to prepare the appropriate language <br />for such a policy and present it to Council at their February 25, <br />1991, meeting. Motion, Ayes -4 Nays -O. Motion passed. <br />$1611 BRUCE & CAMILLE CURTISS, 1920 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD <br />AFTER- THE -FACT VARIANCE <br />RESOLUTION #2924 <br />Camille Curtiss and her attorney, Jeff Mohr, were present. <br />Bernhardson stated the purpose of the Curtiss's application, <br />noting that the Planning Commission had recommended approval with <br />a five to one vote. <br />Gaffron provided Council with photographs of the deck. He <br />stated that this property has been involved with previous zoning <br />applications and that was the basis for the minority Planning <br />Commission vote. He said, "The Curtisses have paid an <br />after - the -fact Variance application fee. The Planning Commission <br />recommended that an after -the -fact building permit fee also be <br />paid. The deck is approximately the same size and shape as the <br />old deck." <br />Goetten stated that after - the -fact applications put the <br />Council in a precarious situation. She said, "Council has <br />usually voted to approve these somewhat reluctantly because we do <br />not approve of blatant disregard of the City Ordinances. Perhaps <br />this is another issue we need to re- examine." <br />Callahan agreed that these applications are difficult. He <br />said, "In this case, we would have granted the application. I <br />believe that the after -the -fact fees paid by the Curtisses <br />constitute a sufficient penalty." <br />Mayor Peterson said, "It is my understanding that the issue <br />of the footings will be addressed by the Building Inspector. If <br />the footings do not meet the building standards, the deck must be <br />rebuilt." <br />Ms. Curtiss said, "We did not totally replace the existing <br />deck. We had a friend that fell off of the deck because the <br />railings are too low. We have'smal'l children and were concerned <br />- 11 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.