My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-28-1985 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1985
>
10-28-1985 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2025 9:46:21 AM
Creation date
12/11/2025 9:32:46 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.
/
429
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
. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 28, 1985. PAGE 6 <br />#981 PHILIP RALEY <br />1395 BROWN ROAD SOUTH <br />VARIANCE <br />RESOLUTION #1880 <br />Phil Kaley was present for this matter. <br />City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a <br />setback variance for a family room addition. <br />Mr. Kaley stated he had no pr(-'-lems with the roposed <br />resolution. <br />It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by <br />Councilmember flammerel, to adopt Resolution V 880 approving <br />the variance. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. <br />#986 GEORGE ROVEGNO <br />2010 SHORELINE DRIVE <br />VARIANCE <br />George a,id Susan Rovegno were present for this matter. <br />City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for an <br />after -the -fact variance for ccr-triction of a 5 foot fence <br />within the 0-75' whereas (based u., inter pretation) only a 3- <br />1/2 foot fence is allowed. <br />George Rovegno noted the serious problems he has had which <br />placement of this fence has solved. He s ibmitted a merr.orandum <br />containing a series of facts pertaining to the issues for <br />Council to review. Mr. Rovegno stated he is willing to do <br />one of the following to solve this matter: 1 ) leave the fence <br />at its existing location and cut it down to 44" except for the <br />first 30 fee*. by the public access which must be only 30" in <br />height , or; 2 ) move the fence !;ack to the let he mark and keep <br />it at its existing 5 foot height except for the .first 30 feet <br />by the public access which must he only 30" in height. He <br />noted that he believes Code Section 1,0.0.3 15(C) could only <br />have been written ak>out intersecting street lots. He also <br />indicated his frustration with the City in dealing with the <br />problems he has encountered which forced him to erect the <br />fence. <br />Mayor Butler stated that. the fence poses a safety hazard. <br />Councilmember Frahm indicated that applicant's problems <br />were valid and felt. the City should address the problem of <br />trespassing and litter. He also stated hewas agreeable to a <br />3-1/2 foot high fence in its present location. <br />Mayor Butler stated it would be setting a precedent by <br />allowing this fence. <br />City Admi ni st r ator Bernhai dson noted that appl icant needs a <br />ve riance for the 3-1/2 foot accessory structure on a lot that <br />cannot sustain a principal structure. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.