Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COL`�CIL MEETING <br /> I�IONDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2003 <br /> 10. Appeal of Administrative Decision—Fox Street Drivex•ay—Continued <br /> Moorse stated they needed a grading plan to se� how the trees would actually be affected <br /> by the drive�vay installation. <br /> Boyer stated they were anxious to begin construction on the house. Barrett stated that the <br /> Council could table the application and the applicant would have to revise the plat. They <br /> could still be�in construction, but not on the driti�e«-ay. <br /> Ny�ard su�Qested they change the house's desi� to accommodate the grade, put a drive <br /> off the shared access, and save the trees. <br /> Johnson stated that they had received verbal appro�-al for the plan_ Prosa stated the plans <br /> were appro�-ed until they went for the buildin� permit. <br /> Nygard stated they might not be able to save the trees anywa��. <br /> Weinberger and Gaffron stated they had a�adin�plan, but it was insufficient and they <br /> needed more detail. <br /> White stated construction on the house could be started, but the c�b cut was tabled. <br /> Murphy stated that construction access would be allowed through the shared access drive <br /> only. <br /> 1�Iurphy mo��ed, and Sansevere seconded, to table Item 10, Appeal of Administrative <br /> Decision—Fox Street Drive�vay. <br /> Vote: Ayes �, Navs 0. <br /> 4. #02-276-� Commercial Planned Unit De�-elopment <br /> Weinberger stated tha he City considered a CPL� district lo�i-in� a request for a <br /> proposed office developm t on a vacant prope:ty in Nav e. Th� multi-unit office <br /> complex ���ould create indivi 1 office buildinQs, eac eld in pri�-ate ownership. Such a <br /> development is currently not possi e in the B-� di- ct based on the minimum lot size <br /> and�vidth standards. The CPUD �vou create a istrict for the proposed development, <br /> and would create a district that�vould all v o er development op�ons in the commercial <br /> areas of the City«�here strict compliance e underlying zonine ordinance is not <br /> practical. y <br /> Weinberger stated that the CPUD ould not affect e B-2 distric� as B-2 is lakefront � � <br /> property that has been reserve or marina use. The b efits of the CPUD are that it <br /> would allo«-approval of e� site plan ��ith indi�-idual pe ormance standards written into <br /> the final de��elopment d ument. If the project R-ere not completed, then the property <br /> � <br /> 6 <br />