Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 9,1995 <br />i(#n - #2071 James and Joann Jundt - Continued) <br />HuiT moved to table t** - application. She a^ed what would be accomplished by saing <br />the plan. Hurt is concerned that replacement with only 9" of trees is not wbat 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 Th?re 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 />CaHahan questioned why additional direction would be needed if the «ssue had not <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 it inch-tor-inch was <br />the criteria used It was noted that a one-for-r^ne 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 -t-1/2" trees, and no building permit issued prior to lull comprehensive plan <br />received by StatT including what has been completed and future prpjeas 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 \ ariance <br />Gaffron asked for ciaritication that the approval was based on not issuing the <br />waterproofing permit until the plan was received and in hand by October 13 <br />V'ote .Ayes 5. Nays 0. <br />(#12) #2072 GRA^ DON K. NEW M.AN. JR*, 1655 BOHNS POINT ROAD - <br />VARIANCE/CUP - RESOLUTION #3618 <br />The applicant had representation.