My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-10-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
05-10-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2023 4:32:06 PM
Creation date
1/19/2023 4:24:37 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
145
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, April 26, 2004 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS, Continued <br />Sanscvere expressed his concern that this Ordinance was put into place very quickly without <br />consideration of how it might impact this resident’s right »o make a living. <br />While he felt keeping a commercial vehicle in a tightly packed neighborhood was inappropriate. <br />White suggested amending the Ordinance with an acreage minimum, acknowledging that Timm <br />has several acres. <br />Timm stated that 5 years ago his wife contacted the City and was told that they were in compliance <br />and allowed to keep their dump truck on their property. Now the Ordinance has suddenly changed <br />and they have been told they are out of compliance. <br />Moorse stated that a 5 acre minimum was applied. <br />Gaffron stated that staff had discussed 2-5 acre minimums. He added that cither w ay, the City may <br />not be able to resolve the issues between the two neighbors. He suggested the dump truck be kept <br />less visible. <br />Timm stated that the neighbor’s views are not obstructed by the truck, nor can he hardly see it. It is <br />only when Timm drives past the neighbor’s home via an easement that it is noticed. He maintained <br />that he had been granted a 30’ easement for a dnveway across the neighbor’s property, which the <br />neighbor has been increasingly narrowing to 10' in order to prohibit his access via the dump truck. <br />Sanscvere asked whether there was a potential to move the driveway. <br />Mrs. Timm stated that the garages and dnveway are .set up to face the current access. She pointed <br />out that they have 2 '/i acres of land and this has caused them quite a hardship. <br />McMillan asked if others had complained about the Ordinance. <br />Gaffron stated that, while only one has come forw ard to date, he would not be surprised that others <br />come forward due to the recent change in the Ordinance. He acknowledged that, in the past, people <br />w'erc told they could have these vehicles on their property, and now the new Ordinance prohibits <br />this. <br />White noted that the resident had been granted an easement and is not being allowed to use it to the <br />alloned allowance. White suggested that the Council consider an Ordinance appeal until they have <br />had adequate time to address this issue. <br />Sansevere indicated that it seems the neighbor is taunting the Timm’s, and their attorney, with the <br />City ’s Ordinance. <br />Murphy asked Timm what he wished the Council to do. <br />Timm stated that he would just like to keep his livelihood in tact. <br />PAGE 4 of 12 <br />...ii
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.