01-27-1997 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 27, 1997 (#4 - #2195 Genmar Industries - Continued) Jabbour asked the applicant if the use of the green space could be limited to 2 boats. McConnell said with the boats on trailers, they would need space for 4 boats minimum as it is important to the success of the business to have a critical mass on display and in the water. She said she had felt the Council's main concern was with parking and feels they can maintain the green space. Jabbour noted the parking lot could be used for display in the winter when times overlap the months noted for the operation to be open. He asked if the display boats could be kept within the existing footprint of the building. Kelley said he does not agree. He felt that by allowing a variance for parking, the concept was to free up more green space. Peterson agreed with Kelley. Goetten asked the applicant if less boats could be displayed on the green space. McConnell felt the minimum would be 4 boats. Jabbour felt it is difficult to stipulate the number of boats when boats come in different sizes. He preferred maintaining the number of boats that would fit within a certain footprint. Planning Commissioner Schroeder questioned the ability of the applicant to increase the number of slips with the amount of shoreline available. Gaffron said the LMCD allows a specific density. If the breakwater is included, the applicant would be allowed about 330 • slips with 1 per 29' of shoreline. He noted there are other restraints that limit this ability, such as parking facilities. Schroeder said the Commission's point was to limit the amount of parking available to the number of slips cannot increase. McConnell suggested an alternative. She noted the Planning Commission recommended approval of 3 additional parking stalls. If the approval was granted for 10 additional stalls to accommodate boat storage, the applicant would be willing to eliminate any display in the lake yard. Goetten said she would not approve this alternative. The Council in noting their difference of opinions, commented that the existing building could be used as a maintenance facility with permit approval. Jabbour indicated that the proposal would be a major improvement to the property. Goetten asked for clarification on tree removal and replacement. The code calls for trees 6" for larger located in the 0 -75' setback to be replaced tree for tree (not inch for inch). This proposal calls for the necessary tree replacement but it will not necessarily occur in the same area due to the site limitations. McConnell reported that the applicant did an evaluation of the site to decide whether to repair the existing building and use as a maintenance facility or to enhance the property and use consistent with their goals for the future. McConnell said the Planning Commission's recommendation is acceptable to the applicant. • 6