My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-13-1997 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1997
>
10-13-1997 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2023 10:09:37 AM
Creation date
8/1/2023 10:05:55 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.
/
408
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
r <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 1997 <br />that most of the homes in the area have some sort of visible barrier within 6 ’ of the road <br />with fences or trees, and he feels this fence would be consistent with the nei^thborhood. <br />Robert Floyd, 960 West Femdale Road, agreed with the removal of the garage, noting it <br />to be an eyesore and hazardous. He felt the problems with parking and trespassing were <br />good reasons to allow the fence to be located closer to the road. Floyd said the road has a <br />blind curve in that area. He felt the distance of the fence from the road as proposed is a <br />good idea, and the existing fence should be removed. <br />Floyd questioned the relationship between this property and the 20' strip of land. He <br />indicated that it was his feeling the subdivision and improvements should not be addressed <br />until this relationship has been solved. He does not feel permits should be issued without <br />the determination. <br />Jeny McCourtne/ said his property is in sight of the proposed garage, and he supports the <br />improvements proposed. <br />Hawn said if the fence and garage received approval, both would be subject to the legal <br />approval of the subdivision with respect to the two lots. If pending legal aaion goes <br />against h, she felt the applicant should be prepared to remove them. The combination <br />with Brooks property must be solved. <br />Brooks responded that the property to the north is not in dispute. He said he has no doubt <br />about the ownership. The question is with the 20'strip of land. Brooks said he would <br />remove the fence if he had to in the future. <br />i
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.