My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/16/2013 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
09/16/2013 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/20/2018 3:36:09 PM
Creation date
12/20/2018 3:36:04 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, September 16,2013 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> condemnation. In this particular case,the City would be obtaining some right-of-way, but with only 30 <br /> feet, it would be a tight feet. The additional 20 feet would make it less difficult to achieve. <br /> Gaffron noted in the Planning Commission packet there is a survey of the property to the east which <br /> shows the right-of-way dedication along Northern Avenue. Exhibit J shows the 66 feet that was <br /> originally dedicated and vacated and then the approximate 20-foot strip that then was dedicated at some <br /> point. Gaffron stated to his understanding that strip continues along the road for all properties except for <br /> the most easterly lot at the northern end. If there is a 50-foot dedication, it would put the line right up <br /> against the front door of that house, which would definitely be an issue at some point in the future. <br /> Gaffron stated it is also likely the City does not have to relocate Northern Avenue but that at this point it <br /> is undetermined. <br /> Leskinen asked if the 50-foot roadway was required, whether the City would recapture what had been <br /> vacated in the past or whether there would be an additional amount. <br /> Gaffron stated the City would recapture 50 of the 66 feet that was originally dedicated and vacated. <br /> Thiesse asked what the City would need for a road in an area like this practically speaking. <br /> Gaffron indicated 30 feet would probably work but that it would be a tight fit. The standard road width <br /> would likely be 24 to 28 feet and that 30 feet would leave very little on either side for a shoulder if the <br /> road complies with the code. <br /> Leskinen asked whether the proposed homes on Exhibit C take into account the wetland setbacks. <br /> Gaffron indicated it does except Lot No. 4 in the very northwest corner would be very close to the 50-foot <br /> setback that is required from the wetland. Gaffron stated the lots may have to be tweaked somewhat but <br /> that generally all of them reflect a 40-foot buffer plus a 10-foot setback from the wetland. <br /> Leskinen asked if the lots meet the other setback requirements. <br /> Gaffron stated the lots are pushed right up against the setbacks. The back lots are required to have a 15- <br /> foot setback on both sides and the front lots only have to have 10 feet on the sides. <br /> Leskinen asked if they meet the City's back lot standards. <br /> Gaffron indicated the issue with the back lots is where you measure the lot width. In the normal back lot <br /> situation,the portion of the 30-foot outlot, which is the corridor for the driveway,the front lot line would <br /> be the extension of the end of that 30-foot corridor. If you angle that so it forms a V,you would still <br /> measure from the end of that outlot. The code also requires a measurement of the lot width at the rear of <br /> the 45-foot setback. Gaffron stated if you measure across that, it would be 60 feet and the requirement is <br /> 100 feet. <br /> Thiesse asked whether it is possible to balance the lot that is less than a half-acre in order to make it <br /> conform. <br /> Page 27 of 34 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.