Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF .JULY 18, 1983. Pare 11 <br />ULRICH (CONT) <br />Mabusth stated that she had never been made aware of <br />any other alternatives to muskrat problems from the <br />DNR. She noted that this seawall method was an <br />acceptable method to the DNR. <br />1761 DOUGLAS SMITH <br />3237 CASCO CIRCLE <br />VARIANCE <br />Callahan noted that the Council minutes of July 28, <br />19RO reflect that there are no other methods for the <br />muskrat problem. <br />Goetten moved to table Wi l l i am Ul r i --1' i appl icat io,, <br />pending receipt of input from the City Engineer, the <br />DVR's "other methods", and the neighbors. Goetten <br />would like to inspect the other sites in Orono that <br />have seawalls to see if the seawall solvers the <br />prablr,rn. Also for staff to check out the jrainageway. <br />M--Oonald seconded. 'tote: Ayes (4) , Nays (1) . <br />Adams minority opinion - Adams noted that he felt that <br />the problem, Mr. Ulrich has with the muskrats is very <br />urgent. He noted that Mr. Ulrich ,as a very well <br />thought out plan eliminating the safety problem he has <br />on his property and to table the application may be <br />creating a safety hazard. Anyone -an step into one of <br />the muskrat holes and break a leg or a small child could <br />fall into one of thos,r and drown. <br />Mr. Ulrich stated that he raid fill in the holes caused <br />by the muskrat,.;. <br />Mabusth not,Fd that Wien she took the appl ication in it <br />appeared to be a simple lot of separate record and it <br />]id not tnaet 11% of the stan,lards. While doing the <br />review she found a problem of comnon ownership. <br />Two neighbors were present for this application. <br />lane Remien and Pat Spilseth. The huilder was pr,asent <br />for O,auglas Smith. <br />Sime aske,J if there wasn't a comcnrn o iership problem <br />would staff hAve any other problems with this <br />application. <br />Mabusth stated that if this was a lot of separate <br />record, staff would still have a problem with this <br />application. <br />Goetten asked the neighbors if they had any ,comments. <br />Pat Spi 1 Seth stated that she would be opposed to this <br />variance application because their lots are so close <br />together and the noise level could be bad. <br />Jane Rem .•n stated that she too would be c,pposed to the <br />gar larv_-e sppl iestic,)n !-)er*ause of the tots being so <br />-lose together. She stated if the lot isn't right <br />-cize h-)w ran you justify buil,iin,J on i t 7 <br />