My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-25-1999 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1999
>
10-25-1999 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/13/2023 4:23:16 PM
Creation date
4/13/2023 4:20:32 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
280
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
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR OCTOBER II, 1999 <br />(#5) U2492 RICK AND GAIL LUZAICH, 2490 OLD BEACH ROAD - VARIANCES <br />AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT- Continued <br />Barrett recommended that the Council think of the restoration plan as not being linked to the <br />conditional use permit or the variance, consider what they would want to see as an <br />appropriate restoration plan and if the applicant will not agree to it and record it against the <br />land, that is predicate for litigation. <br />Kelley asked if the Council can move the trees on the plan if they don’t feel the plan is <br />appropriate. <br />Barrett said yes, he thinks the restoration plan is an independent piece. <br />Kell'^y asked if the Council members would like to move the two maple trees back to the <br />center of the property. <br />Sansevere asked Nygard where the trees by the lake were supposed to be located. <br />Nygard said the plan being shown is not what the Planning Commission reviewed. He said <br />the plan they reviewed had a few trees in the middle and the Planning Commission wanted to <br />see more trees and less shrubs. He does not believe the applicants followed the direction of <br />the Planning Commission. <br />Kelley said the trees should be moved to the top of the bluff, not do\%n by the lake. <br />Sansevere said he would like the new trees planted as close as possible to the siumps of the <br />trees that were removed. He thinks the Council needs to send a message to everyone that they <br />can’t cut their trees down to get the view and then replace the trees on the side. <br />Peterson said there is a problem with the definition of the bluff. <br />Flint explained to Gaffron that the Council was addressing the question of where the bluff <br />starts and whether the Council has any power to deal with the area near the house. <br />Gaffron said the total removal of trees is not allowed in a bluff. The bluff includes the bluff <br />impact zone which is the area up to the top of the bluff and the next 20 feet. The top of the <br />bluff is the point at which the slope changes from 18 percent or more to 18 percent or less. <br />Sansevere asked if the three trees near the house are in an area that the Council has authority <br />over. <br />Kelley said Weinberger has defined the top of the bluff at the 954 contour, <br />Gaffron said, in his opinion, the w hole feature is the bluff and if they have clear cut on the <br />bluff, those trees would have to be replaced. <br />Page 15 <br />•I
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.