My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
20210408122039931
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
B
>
Big Island
>
480 Big Island - 23-117-23-32-0062
>
Land Use
>
LA21-000017, CUP
>
20210408122039931
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/12/2026 1:04:05 PM
Creation date
3/12/2026 12:59:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
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).
View images
View plain text
I equest adequate time with M Curtis to r <br />and documents for her recommendation t <br />o <br />esearch relevant, accurate intent <br />committee and council. <br />Given the harshness of this language, it would seem reasonable to find a <br />solution does not create awin-lose scenario. <br />Applicant is only person in 35 years stating permit is "harsh language". <br />Existing Dock Permit Dated June 1983 <br />One potential resolution for the council t <br />o consider would be <br />new permit where both #480 and #230 are named in the permit, the old <br />permit is retired and we share a dock, each permit holder having a side. <br />Please see my replaced narrative, LMCD, lake shore feet, <br />trench etc. and also the relative material submitted by Jud. <br />This solution is designed so owners at <br />to create a <br />drain <br />230 Big Island are no <br />impacted, they still retain their permitted dock <br />property and allows me access t <br />solution it does balance <br />i <br />rights <br />fields, <br />t materially <br />to access their <br />his is not the perfect <br />the needs of each party and would work to limit the <br />mpact on the existing construct that exists today. <br />230, 210, 260, land and lakeshore right of way are negatively impacted... <br />o my property. While t <br />As a show of good faith, should this scenario be feasible, I would consider <br />purchasing a dock at my expense if one is not currently available from Ms. <br />Farnes and Mr. Bruntjen. <br />believe this outcome would be similar i <br />#130 and #220 share an access point. <br />Not remotely similar, <br />Right -of -Way Constr <br />n spirt to how the lot owners at <br />220 had structures and access points not accurate. <br />uction Traffic Concern: As a point of clarity, I am not <br />proposing that this site and right-of-way be used as an access point for <br />construction vehicles. The right-of-way I am requesting would used as a <br />walking path from the dock up the main road everyone currently uses. Who <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.