My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-25-1991 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1991
>
02-25-1991 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/21/2024 10:16:38 AM
Creation date
5/21/2024 10:13:34 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.
/
323
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
tf <br />Ii <br />I <br />I' <br />f <br />15 <br />ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 11, 1991 <br />OTHER-SWIMMING POOL/PLASTIC HARDCOVER CONTINUED <br />It ths conssnsus of Council that appropriate measures be <br />taken at this time. <br />It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to <br />conceptually adopt a policy stating that the water surface area <br />of swimming pools will be considered hardcover, and that any <br />landscape plastic existing within the 0~<5' setback area is there <br />and should be removed. Landscape plastic will no <br />longer be accepted as tradeable "existing hardcover" wnen <br />considering zoning applications requesting additional structural <br />hardcover. Staff is directed to prepare the appropriate language <br />fQjf such a policy and present it to Council at their February 25, <br />1991, meeting. Motion, Ayes-4 Nays-0. Motion passed. <br />#1611 BRUCE a CAMILLE CURTISS, 1920 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD <br />after-the-fact variance <br />RESOLUTION #2924 <br />Camille Curtiss and her attorney, Jeff Mohr, were present. <br />Bernhardson stated the purpose of the Curtiss’s application, <br />noting that the Planning Commission had recommended approval with <br />a five to one vote. <br />Gaffron provided Council with photographs of the deck. He <br />stated that this property has been involved with previous zoning <br />applications and that was the basis for the minority Planning <br />Commission vote. He said, "The Curtisses have paid an <br />after-the-fact Variance application fee. The Planning Commission <br />recommended that an after-the-fact building permit fee also be <br />paid. The deck is approximately the same size and shape as the <br />old deck." <br />Goetten stated that after-the-fact applications put the <br />Council in a precarious situation. She said, "Council has <br />usually voted to approve these somewhat reluctantly because we do <br />not approve of blatant disregard of the City Ordinances. Perhaps <br />this is another issue we need to re-examine." <br />Callahan agreed that these applications are difficult. He <br />said, "In this case, we would have granted the application. I <br />believe that the after-the-fact fees paid by the Curtisses <br />constitute a sufficient penalty." <br />Mayor Peterson said, "It is my understanding that the issue <br />of the footings will be addressed by the Building Inspector. If <br />the footings do not meet the building standards, the deck must be <br />rebuilt." <br />Ns. Curtiss said, "We did not totally replace the existing <br />deck. We had a friend that fell off of the deck because the <br />railings are too low. We have small children and were concerned <br />- 11 -
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.