My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-28-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
02-28-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2023 10:51:41 AM
Creation date
1/11/2023 10:25:30 AM
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.
/
422
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
McMillan withdrew her prior motion. <br />McMillan moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the vegetation restoration plan for the pro|ierly <br />located at 2618 Casco Point Road, with the agreement being amended to require a performance <br />Jeposit he retained by the City until June 30,2008. <br />Peterson inquired whether the applicant is agreeable to the date being extended for the pertbmiance <br />deposit. <br />Vogstrom stated that is Fine. <br />VOTR: Ayes 3, Nays 1, Peterson Opposed; Sansevcrc Abstained. <br />Sanseverc indicated he is abstaining from the vote since he was not part of the discussion at the previous <br />Council meeting and also mi.sscd a portion of tonight’s discussion concerning this application. <br />McMillan moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. , a Resolution granting a variance <br />to hardcover for the property located at 2618 Casco Point Road, with Exhibit E being amended as <br />recommended by the City Attorney. VOTE: Ayes 2, Nays 2, Peterson and Murphy Oppu.sed; <br />Sansevcrc Abstained. <br />Barrett stated the motion fails and that Stalf should be directed to prc|)are (Indings to support the denial. <br />Peterson inquired whetlier Council Member Sansevere would like the opportunity to vote on the motion. <br />.Sansevcrc stated in his view since lie was not involved in the discussion at the lust Council ineeling and <br />the majority of tonight’s discussion, that it would not be fair to the applicant or to the rest of the Council <br />for him to vote on this issue at this time. <br />Peterson inquired whether this application could lx; reheard at the Council’s next meeting in order to give <br />Council Member Sansevcrc an opportunity to vote on any motion. <br />Bariett stated that is one option. <br />Pctcreon moved, Murphy seconded, to table the application. <br />Barrett rccoininended that the failed motion be withdrawn and that a motion tabling the application lx; <br />made.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.