My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-27-2014 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
10-27-2014 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2015 2:35:04 PM
Creation date
3/5/2015 2:34:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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 <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 27, 2014 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> Page 9 of 32 <br />9. #14-3691 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE – PRELIMINARY <br />PLAT <br /> <br />This item follows Item No. 10. <br /> <br /> <br />10. #14-3689 LAKESHORE HOLDINGS, LLC – 2490 CARMAN STREET – VARIANCE – <br />RESOLUTION NO. 6458 <br /> <br />McMillan noted the Council looked at this application two weeks ago and that the reason she did not want <br />this item on the Consent Agenda is that she would like one clarification on the resolution. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated Staff has reviewed Paragraph No. 5 on Page 3 of the resolution and that she can read the <br />suggested change Staff has come up with. Staff would suggest the paragraph be changed to read as <br />follows: “The applicant understands and is hereby put on notice that the City is not required to screen the <br />fire lane from adjacent properties. The City may institute measures to development approvals or other <br />means to preserve landscaping and regulate or remove encroachments which have the potential to <br />interfere with direct access by the public.” <br /> <br />McMillan stated that change makes sense. McMillan stated she does not believe the applicant is here <br />tonight and that she does not know if that will be an issue. <br /> <br />Curtis stated the change goes to the intent of the changes that were discussed last time. <br /> <br />Mattick noted the change is not imposing any conditions on the applicant but is more of a statement of <br />what the City is or is not going to do with that area. Mattick stated the change makes it clear that the <br />public can use the area and that the City is not necessarily required to screen it, but it makes it clear that <br />the City will remove any encroachments if they should occur. Mattick stated it provides notice to the <br />applicant of what the City will or will not do. <br /> <br />McMillan commented this is the type of boilerplate language that could be used in future resolutions to <br />provide clarity to what can be done with the fire lanes. McMillan stated she would also like Staff to begin <br />work on placing some standard markers at the fire lanes and that perhaps the City could use recycled <br />green plastic that is approximately one foot high, which would be a subtle visual marker. <br />Levang stated the markers do not necessarily need to be accompanied by any signage but could serve to <br />simply identify the fire lanes. <br /> <br />McMillan suggested the markers be discussed in a future work session and that she would like to continue <br />to work on clarifying the fire lanes in the City. <br /> <br />Mack stated the Public Works Department has indicated they would be able to mark those locations with <br />the GPS so that if in the future a question arises, the City can go back out and verify the boundaries. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.