Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 26,1998 <br />Flint moved, to reconsider the application. The motion failed for lack of a second to the <br />motion. <br />Brooks said he felt the Council was being disrespectful and not .reasonable in failing to <br />reconsider the application. He feels it is his right as a citizen to be given this <br />reconsideration. <br />Jabbour infer.ned Brooks that the 4/1 vote received previously for variance approval was <br />passed after dit;>cult discussion on the issue. He expressed his thought process regarding <br />the storage ga»age. Jabbour felt the beach users should not have to go all the way to the <br />residence in order to obtain equipment for the beach. He did not view the structure as <br />being storage or a location for trailers. He feels a 12'xl5' structure is adequate for beach <br />use. He said the Council could be polled regarding their opinion, but he felt the applicant <br />was given due consideration. <br />Brooks said he felt too many issues were before the Council for discussion when the <br />variance approval was granted and late on the agenda. Jabbour noted that the issue was <br />the first for review at this meeting. <br />Gaffron indicated the applicant can reapply in 6 month*' Brooks said he was <br />disappointed in the Council's decision not to reconsider the application. Gaftron clarified <br />that since the application itself was approved in October, it would not require a 6 month <br />wait but another application could be submitted by Brooks. <br />Brooks noted new information was submitted. Jabbour acknowledged receipt of the <br />information. He asked Brooks if the facts fairly represent his view. Brooks said they did. <br />(fW) #2308 BROOK PARK REALTY, 3760 SHORELINE DRIVE - PRD & CLASS <br />HI PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION <br />Bill Gleason represented Brook Park Realty. <br />Van Zomeren distributed pictures of the property and reviewed the proposal. The 9.93 <br />acre parcel is located in the LR-IC-I Zoning District and includes 2.2 acres of wetlands <br />and 7.7 acres of dry buildable. The proposal is for 30 townhome units requiring a Class <br />111 Subdivision and PRD approval. The density allowed for this property is 2 units per <br />acre. The applicant is requesting a density credit to allow 3 units per acre. <br />Van Zomeren reviewed the purpose of the PRD, #1 through #5, as noted in the <br />information packet. She explained the PRD, noting variances to subdivision requirements <br />can be allowed if the goals of the PRD are met. There were outstanding issues when the <br />application was last discussed and are listed in the packet as "a-I" on page 2 and forward.