My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-27-1993 Council Minutes2
Orono
>
City Council
>
1993
>
09-27-1993 Council Minutes2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2024 11:09:54 AM
Creation date
1/16/2024 11:06:02 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.
/
333
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
Ilurr asked what precedent this would set for the other two properties. Would they have to be <br />financed for seven years also? <br />Moorse stated it wouKl be possible and is considering whetlicr this situation is unic]uc inoiij’h <br />to set it apart. <br />Goetten feels there is a difference between established properties and new properties. <br />Kelley agreed that the distinction is \ery important and that requiring the full payment could <br />impose r hardship on the owner of an esisting property whereas tlie fee could be <br />included in the fmaneing of a new property. <br />Mayor Callahan stated lliat he is opp«>setl to the request. <br />1 lurr stated her concern alH>ut the precedent. <br />Mayor Callahan stated that a decision wi'uld have to be postponed until the full Council is <br />present since the issue is split evenly. <br />Mr Nett'es commented concerning the precedent, that there is a major difference between the <br />amount of money an individual has lo come up with versus the money a developer would be <br />required to come up with and that it would be more difficult for an individual to obtain the <br />funds. <br />Mavor Callahan noted that there is not a purcrose Ct^reement signed by Mr. Melamed tmd that <br />if there is no purchase agreement b> I riday, he would vote no on Monday because he felt it <br />was not worth it to make the arrangement for Just one property. <br />(«20) ROAD MAINTENANCE I’Ol.K V <br />Moorse explained the information included in the packet describes what there is to consider if <br />the Council is going to move away Irom its current policy ol leaving the private roadways on <br />their own in terms of maintenance. 1 he inlormation describes locations and conditions of <br />roads to be considered, along with an estimate ol costs lor maintenance. <br />Hu’T asked how nuuiy roads don't have cul-de-sacs and what would it cost to build that right <br />of way for each one. <br />Cierhardsi'ii noted that the costs listed do not include the acquisition of those rights of way. <br />Kelley asked how many of the rt. id' w ish to remain private. <br />Gerhardson said he believes he’s had u call from every one of them indicating an interest in a <br />policy or procedure regarding the C iiy providing maintenance. <br />Ilurr commented on Millsion K-ing c.illed a private road because of the school bus using it. <br />Kelley explained that the bu.ses do use the private roads to drop the children oil at the door as <br />a matter of safety. <br />It was moved by Mayor C allahan, seconded by Ilurr, to recommend acceptance ol the <br />information. Ayes; 4. Nays 0.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.