My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-09-2020 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2020
>
03-09-2020 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/12/2022 3:29:35 PM
Creation date
1/12/2022 3:23:57 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
225
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 <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, February 24, 20 20 <br />6 :00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 11 of 15 <br /> <br />Edwards agreed with Walsh and said he took the as -built plans for that sewer line. They have good data <br />for the sewer main and they know the depth of the main, the depth of where the connection connects to <br />the main, and based off of installation standards on what slopes you can have on a service line, he came <br />up with the maximum/minimum depth that service line should be at. He also recommended to the <br />Planning Commission if there was still some concern about tha t, it could be written into any requirements <br />that the applicant be required to field locate, which would entail a contractor to come in through the City's <br />sewer main and run a locator up the sewer service to ascertain the depths under the driveway. He said that <br />is not something the City would do but it could be done by somebody else. <br /> <br />Walsh noted that the City did not feel it was necessary to do that because they had accurate data and it <br />was a job the City undertook. <br /> <br />Edwards agreed and stated he did not think the City would need to do that. <br /> <br />Johnson asked whether it was the 222 property that needs the easement. <br /> <br />Walsh stated that was correct. <br /> <br />Johnson noted the neighbors were not present. <br /> <br />Walsh said they were present at the last meeting. He noted the other issue was the easement they have <br />never had and that their line is under somebody else's property. <br /> <br />Edwards stated it would be an easement between two private properties, not something the City is directly <br />involved in. The City recommended the 222 property owners get the easement because it protects them <br />and their continued access to the sewer system. <br /> <br />Walsh said Mr. Azad was nice enough to acknowledge the easement would not be a problem. <br /> <br />Johnson clarified that the variance request is because the easement will reduce the size of the lot. <br /> <br />Walsh, Crosby, and Staff indicated it reduces the lot area. <br /> <br />Walsh said the City Council would be taking the recommendation and approving the variance with the <br />contingency that an easement is created between the two private parties. <br /> <br />Johnson asked if the City Council was approving a motion to create that. <br /> <br />Staff and Walsh said the City Council would be approving a variance. <br /> <br />Johnson noted it would be based upon something that has not yet happened. <br />Walsh and Crosby stated it is a variance conditioned upon getting the easement put together between the <br />two parties. <br /> <br />Mr. Al Azad and Walsh discussed that Mr. Azad would need to get involved and talk with his neighbors <br />to get the variance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.