05-22-2006 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 22, 2006 7:00 o'clock p.m. i (4.#05-3136 TROYBROITZMAN,1860 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued) get into the business of screening for our neighbor's benefit. In addition, she pointed out that trees do not block noise. McMillan stated that Mr. Broitzman had a right to develop his property and the Council did not have to be punitive about the removals. Murphy stated that he still disagreed and maintained that the City had tried to get the applicant to redesign this substantial home. He stated that he would not support the proposed driveway. Palmer pointed out that incorporating a driveway off of the back could be done very nicely. Murphy questioned the need for a tremendous amount of fill to do so. Palmer stated that very little fill would be necessary and that the trees that would be removed were not worthwhile trees, but box elders and some buckthorn. He maintained that a better buffer could be planted with nicer trees. Murphy stated that he believed there already was a worthwhile driveway. Sansevere stated that he might consider a driveway off of the back if a better buffer would be replaced out front. Brokl stated that, due to the 60 day limitation, the Council must take action this evening. Broitzman asked if he left the driveway where it was and added additional trees for a buffer, if he could get approval this evening. Murphy stated that, if the applicant would work with staff and his landscape architect to come up with a suitable plan, he would grant approval. Wytaske stated that it seemed somewhat strict to require them to plant trees all the way up the front of the driveway, as that would be more than was previously there. Murphy stated that he wanted the applicant to plant trees, not just to replace those that were removed, but questioned the plan in which trees were voluntarily to be planted everywhere before, and now they feel the City was being strict requiring certain additions. Mr. Coward, 1950 Heritage Drive, stated that he felt the proposed rain garden was inappropriate, new trees to be planted in the back would not grow due to the conditions, and if the driveway was moved to the back it would be to their detriment. McMillan pointed out that the applicant could adjust the plantings to what would grow in the warranted conditions and encouraged the Cowards to make suggestions. Wytaske pointed out that they had approached the neighbors prior to the original tree removals and no one voiced their concern at that time. It was apparent that no one anticipated the impacts would be so great until after the removals. • PAGE 4 of 9