My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-13-2003 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
01-13-2003 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2023 1:47:48 PM
Creation date
1/26/2023 1:38:42 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
172
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 CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MONDAY, DECEMBER 9,2002 <br />9. M2-2854 Kevin Manley, 1973 Fagerness Point Road —V'ariance/Conditionai Use <br />Permit—Continued <br />Murphy added that he had no problem with the deck, wanted the shed moved, and the <br />sidewalk issue resolved. The lakeshorc issue would have to be tabled. <br />Sanseverc asked if all the neighbors had gravel drives. GafTron stated that ifyou drive on <br />it, it is considered hardcover, regardless of whether it is permeable. The drive wasn’t there <br />before and would require a review process. He stated he did not know if any of the <br />neighbors had their drives approved. <br />Murphy asked about the issue w»th the riprap. Gaffron stated that the property has a <br />vertical slope with waves undercutting it and trees in danger of falling into the lake. <br />Manley stated that five of his neighbors had received an estimate to do the riprap along the <br />lakeshorc all as one job. He is the only person dealing with the City, while the neighbors <br />are dealing with the Watershed District. <br />White stated he preferred not to deal with the issues ad hoc. <br />Manley stated ho would like the Council’s opinion on the plans. Sansevere stated he <br />would like to hear from staff and the engineer before giving an opinion. Manley asked if <br />the application would have to return to the Planning Commi.ssion. Mayor Peterson stated it <br />would, in all fairness to him, because Council relics on the input of the Planning <br />Commission, staff, and the engineers. She added that the Planning Commission hadn’t <br />seen the new plans yet and may approve the application based on one of them. <br />Gaffron stated that on page 1 of item B there was a list of unresolved issues. <br />Regarding the shed that was illegally constructed and located within 2’ of the shoreline. <br />Mayor Peterson, Murphy, and Sanseverc agreed it must be moved before the project is <br />completed. <br />Regarding the parking area, Manley stated that it had been increased in size, but had <br />always been in that location. He stated it had been overgrown and had railroad ties <br />bordering it. He removed the ties and widened it to allow for 3 cars. Mayor Peterson <br />asked If he needed a variance. Gaffron stated he did because it was new hardcover with no <br />indication of what had been there previously. Manley asked if applying for a variance <br />would be a waste of time. Sanseverc stated it looked like cveiy one in the neighborhood <br />had similar parking areas. Gaffron stated they needed a review process because of the <br />specific paring needs for that road. Mayor Peterson instructed Manley to apply for the <br />variance. <br />Regarding the accretions, GafTron stated that Manley’s attorney, Mr. Bishop, claimed that <br />tiTifiitfititffilil I i(i <br />•»; .•
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.