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
r <br />i-t <br />fc <br />I <br />ORONO COUNCIL HBETING HELD FEBRUARY 11, 1991 <br />FACILITIES CONTINUED <br />Bernhardson also presented information addressing options for <br />3torage of Public Works eguipment on an interim basis. He said, <br />"We looked at the possibility of repairing what we have, but <br />that would not be possible. I wou..d like Council's <br />reactions to the options presented. I obtained an estimate cost <br />to have Boarman prepare alternative sketches for building designs <br />suitable for the Crystal Bay site. It would cost approximately <br />$3,000. It may be helpful to include a schematic drawing of a <br />building with the questionnaire we are sending to the Crystal Bay <br />residents. Council may also wish to establish a meeting date." <br />Jabbour asked if it would be appropriate to send the <br />questionnaire prior to making a decision about common or split <br />sites. <br />Callahan replied, "If the residents indicate that they do <br />not want a facility in this location, there is no point to <br />following through with that aspect. There is also the <br />possibility that some of the residents will not like the <br />particular scheme we include with the questionnaire and may <br />reject the concept entirely on that basis." <br />Goetten and Mayor Peterson agreed that they would only like <br />the residents' opinions about using the present location, not how <br />they would like the building to look. <br />Bernhardson stated that some residents may agree to this <br />location, based on how the building will appear. He said, "We <br />could just send a basic footprint of the angular and square <br />des-igns we have on file. Wc; are sending the residents some basic <br />information and background regarding this issue." <br />Goetten indicated that she did not fully support the <br />expenditure of an additional $3,000 without having input from the <br />Crystal Bay residents. <br />Callahan said, "It was ray understanding that the schematic <br />drawing was to help Council make a decision." <br />Jabbour stated that he was anxious to hear Mary Butler's <br />views on this issue. He said, "Other than the cost concerns, I <br />am also questioning whether the City is prepared to grant itself <br />a Variance, which would be requirad if construction occurs on <br />this site. I think the City needs to address the philosophical <br />issues before we worry about aesthetics or what the neighbors <br />want." <br />Goetten stated that she favors the utilization of one site <br />as opposed to two, but wants Council to reach a consensus in that <br />regard before it takes the next step. <br />- 24 - <br />II-
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.