My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-22-2002 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2002
>
07-22-2002 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 10:16:23 AM
Creation date
2/9/2023 9:37:55 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.
/
555
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
MlNirrES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON JULY 14,1997 <br />(#4 - #2246 Donald Cuirier, Jr. - Continued) <br />Currier mformed FKnt that the antenna could not be nested or rused in the location <br />required due to the trees. He noted Ac survey shows the trees plotted Aat are affected <br />by the antenna and the tree cover then drawn in. <br />Jabbour noted that the ability to have a nested antenna is more visibly attractive than an <br />antenna that must be fiiDy extended at all times. Currier said trees would still have to be <br />removed to allow for the fully extended antenna. <br />Jabbour was informed that the neighbor in whose yard the antenna would fall. If it would <br />topple, gave Ins approval. <br />Flint questioned why the antenna cannot be moved 15’ further along the sme line noting <br />the sur\ ey does noi indicate frees in that area. Currier said the free cover is located there <br />fftid would result in the loss of a lotus tree. <br />Jabbour was informed that the horizontal width is a 34* maximum with a 20* long boom. <br />Flint was told that the antenna ‘is directional motorized by a rotor. <br />In answer to the question of how dose the nei^bot*s structures are to the north property <br />line, Moorse said a letter indicates that the area is ungroomed without any structures. <br />Kdley questioned what would happen if that property owner wanted to build a garage in <br />that location. Currier said the neighbor told him he could put the antenna on the property <br />I'me if he wanted to. Goetten reported that if the neighboring property was sold, the <br />antenna could create problems for the new owner. Kdlty suggested a call option be <br />placed on the antenna if that were to occur. Barrett indicated that tins would be difficult <br />to CTiforce. <br />Peterson was informed that there were a couple other antennas in the City and no <br />problems have been reported. The only other retractable antenna that was on a property <br />in the City was remov^ when the resident moved. Jabbour said he feels the retractable <br />antenna is a great idea. Currier indicated he would like to maintain the trees to lessen the <br />visual impact. <br />Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3925 per the Planmng <br />Commission recommendation. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Flint. <br />(#5) #224S DAVID AND JODI RAHN, 1385 REST POINT ROAD - VARlAhICE <br />RESOLUTION NO. 3926 <br />David Rahn was present. <br />L
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.