Re: request for loop driveway - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�,0 b 3 S w�.� ��-- �- � �� To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Fro�a: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: April 19, 1990 Subject: Lot 2, Block 2, Sugar Woods - Request for Loop Driveway List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Pflaum's Letter Exhibit B - Site Plan - Loop Drive Exhibit C - Site Plan - Turnaround Exhibit D - Site Plan - Backout Apron + Interior Turnaround Cul-de-sac Exhibit E - Site Plan Approved by Staff with Issuance of Building Permit Exhibit F - Affidavit - Steiner & Roppelman Inc. Exhibit G - Hardcover Fact Sheet Exhibit H - Area Calculations for Sugar Woods Lots Exhibit I - Staff Sketches The developer of Sugar Woods has asked for clarification concerning Condition 1-F of Resolution �2652 (resolution approving conditional use permit for PUD) , written as follows: F. The applicant has created a no-grading zone/woodlands protection area within the private open space outlots (namely Outlots A and B), and the setback areas defined within each building lot. Within those areas no future owner will be allowed to remove trees in excess of 2" in diameter at 4' above grade. No grading is allowed within the protected area, however, each residentiTal lot m_� include one driveway up to 20' wide leading to the loop road. This driveway may be graded and trees of any size may �emoved to bui ld it. The subdivider's agreement should also define the protected areas such as the setback area of each lot and the private open space outlots. Staff has not researched the minutes nor the staff inemos that would confirm the City's intent regarding this specific directive of that condition. It is the City's position that a single access/curb cut/driveway with a maximum width of 20' was to be installed to serve each residential pad. Such a driveway would cross the 50' wide front street protected area. The single underlying theme of this PUD has been to protect the unique trees within the subdivision. This condition was an attempt by the City to lessen the impact on the tree growth by limiting access drives to one at a maximum width of 20'. It would be the City's position that a loop driveway would be two driveways. It is the developer's position that a looped driv�eway is one driveway and not prohibited by resolution #2652. Please review Exhibit A, Mr. Pf laum's letter ref lects his clients position.