Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 9, 1995 <br />( #11 - #2071 James and Joann Jundt - Continued) <br />• <br />Hurr moved to table the application. She asked what would be accomplished by seeing <br />the plan. Hurr is concerned that replacement with only 9" of trees is not what would be <br />required of other applicants. Mabusth said Staff does not have a set pattern established <br />for tree replacement. The building inspector makes the decision. There is no standard in <br />the code for tree replacement. <br />Gaffron commented that it was not a tree -for -tree replacement. Zoning staff does not <br />review the tree removal permits. Gaffron said no input was received from the building <br />inspector on this application. Gaffron asked for additional direction from the Council. <br />Callahan questioned why additional direction would be needed if the issue had not yet <br />been reviewed. Gaffron said it was often difficult in an after - the -fact request to decide <br />what is appropriate. He was concerned with tree survival and density if inch- for -inch was <br />the criteria used. It was noted that a one- for -one tree replacement was done on a project <br />on Stubbs Bay. <br />Callahan noted that the Planning Commission felt the two maples for one elm was <br />reasonable. Hurr said she did not concur. <br />Kelley asked who had done the drawing. Gaffron said the applicant. Kelley said <br />decisions might be different when they involve the 0 -75' zone. <br />• Jabbour moved, Callahan seconded, to approve the variance providing tree replacement is <br />of three 4-1/2" trees, and no building permit issued prior to full comprehensive plan <br />received by Staff including what has been completed and future projects shown. Callahan <br />asked if the motion could be contingent on the plan in hand by a certain date, which was <br />decided to be Friday, October 13. <br />Hurr asked what would happen if the plans were not satisfactory. Callahan said the idea <br />was to get a general scheme of the property. Mabusth said the plan could be reviewed. <br />Kelley was concerned that this was opening a pandora's box and questioned whether the <br />plans would be of issues not requiring a variance. <br />Gaffron asked for clarification that the approval was based on not issuing the <br />waterproofing permit until the plan was received and in hand by October 13. <br />Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />( 412) #2072 GRAYDON K. NEWMAN, 38., 1655 BOHNS POINT ROAD - <br />VARIANCE /CUP - RESOLUTION #3618 <br />• The applicant had representation. <br />9 <br />