03-23-1998 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MARCH 9,1998 (#7 - Wiyil Orono Development Ordinance Amendment - Continued) Flint said he did not object to the use but only wanted some clarification He does not believe everything can be listed but some guidelines are necessary for whatever is being «ivisioned iabbour reviewed for Staff that the Council supports the change to the ordina- o j 'nd bagel and coffee shops appropriate uses. The use could include co*d and wann j , and a variety of muffins. The Council would like to see some limitations placed on the use to limit expansion. Inside and outside seating will also require review Goetten asked about a portable use. Barrett responded that the shop would still most likely have a kitchen. Hv siip^gested Council consider whether food can be prepared to order. Barrett suggest! the possibility of adding another restaurant class, III, to limit it Jabbour suggested Staft'review the matter with Barrett Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to t^le Application #2327. Vote. Ayes 5, Nays 0. O'Sullivan asked afr'tit the time frame of the review and whether the entire B<5 use list would be reviewed He noted that cellular phone sales was not included on the list and was a possible tenant. Jabbour informed O'Sullivan that the Coundl has other priority items that will take precedence before a full review is done of the business districts He said the City would like to do a comprehensive review. Gaffron concurred that the need to review such matters is necessary, but it will not happen in the near future. Jabbour informed O'Sullivan that he can apply for any use, but approval would be dependent upon the Council and their viewpoint. Gaffiron said if the use was a similar use, an applicant can appeal i ' a finding of similarity; if not similar, an applicant would have to ^^k to amend the coue Jabbour noted that any use needs to fit in with the vision of the B-5. (#8) **2326 BRUCE NEWTON, 3580 FREDERICK STREET - AFTER-THE- FACi VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4044 The Applicant was present Bressler distributed pictures of the property. The application is a request for an after-the- fact rear setback variaiu:e for a deck replacement that was illegally rebuilt. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the variance As a condition of the approval, the applicant has agreed to provide a roadway and utility easement for the portion of the roadway crossing the property and the area 5' behind the curb as no legally described easement has been recorded Bressler reported that this portion of the road has been used by the City for many years, and the easement will clarify its use.