Laserfiche WebLink
RrGULAR PIEETING OF THF ORONO COUIJCIL, NOVEMBER 27, 1979 Page 18 <br /> Questions we would hope to be able to ans+wer at NORTH SHORE DRIVE SEG9EF <br /> this meeting would include: (Continued) <br /> 1. [Jhat is the Prohler.l? iahich specific properties <br /> should be included and why? <br /> 2. �Jhat are routing alternatives? ��That is a rouqh <br /> estimated cost for each alternative, including <br /> using septic systems and/or rlethoc�s other than <br /> sewer hookup? <br /> 3. ��7ould Metro Council force sewer on us in the <br /> end anyhow? <br /> Attached to this memo, I have included a re�ort on <br /> svstem conditions for each of the �ro�erties <br /> involved, as well as a discussion of possible <br /> alternatives, including a cormmunity septic s_y�tem. <br /> Please note that this is one of the areas which <br /> we have asked to have included on the PZPCA' s P�Sunicipal <br /> Pdeeds List for possible funding of sewaqe treatment <br /> projects. <br /> Council I�ieeting - November ?_7 , 1979 <br /> Paurus moved, P4ayor Van Nest seconded, to apnrove <br /> the above memo and instructed staff to set a date <br /> at the next Council meeting for an informational <br /> meeting concerning the sewer probler_ls on North <br /> Shore Drive. P4otion, Aves (3) - Nays (0) . <br /> Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record <br /> F'EiJCE ORDI�tANCE <br /> a merio regarding a proposed fence ordinance <br /> dated November 6, 1979 , which states: <br /> The attached draft No. 2 contains several minor <br /> corrections or clarifications of supporting <br /> sections, plus a rewrite of_ Sections 957 & 958, <br /> the "meat" of the regulations. <br /> The sense of direction at the last Council meetinc� <br /> was to allow onl_y 42" high, 200 oPaque fences with <br /> all higher/denser fences and walls beinq variances <br /> (or conditional use permits) . <br /> While I agree that one cannot foresee all situations, <br /> I strongly believe that such a lirmitation would be <br /> overly restrictive. I believe that Council, Planning <br /> Commission and staff have enough collective experience <br /> to write into the code reasonahle situations where <br /> taller or more opac�ue fences, or even masonry walls <br /> are entirely acceptable to Orono' s cor_mr.iunit�� standards, <br /> or even necessary by our lifestyle. <br /> (Continued) <br />