My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-23-1990 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
Historical
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
04-23-1990 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2019 10:25:54 AM
Creation date
4/23/2019 10:25:54 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
3 ` +• ri <br />MINUTES OF ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 23, 1990 <br />ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: • <br />#1334 REBERS CONSTRUCTION <br />SUGAR WOODS PLAT - LOT 2, BLOCK 2 <br />REQUEST FOR LOOP ROAD <br />Mr. Sid Rebers, Mr. Stephen Pflaum, Attorney, Mr. Richard <br />Lang of Steiner & Koppelman, Inc., and Mr. Hugh Maynard, <br />Attorney, were present for this matter. <br />Bernhardson explained that the purpose of this is to give <br />further consideration to the driveways to be placed on selected <br />properties within the development. <br />Mabusth stated that the amended driveway plan proposed for <br />Lot 2, Block 2, necessitated backing onto Sugarwoods Drive. This <br />occurred because the original plan submitted with the building <br />application had other paving improvements within the front <br />setback area that cannot be classified as a driveway. Mabusth <br />said that the Chief Kilbo advised that once the person backs onto <br />Sugarwoods Drive he /she must continue in the proper flow of <br />traffic, or will violate State Law. Mabusth stated that it is <br />necessary to provide an on -site turn - around. She showed Council <br />three options to achieve this using portions of the front setback <br />area where site conditions require placement of the house right <br />at the front street setback line. Mabusth explained that Choice <br />#1, which provides a loop driveway, would have the least impact <br />on the setback area and existing trees for this specific • <br />application. Mabusth informed Council that other lots in the <br />development will require the same special considerations. She <br />said that staff will prepare a resolution that sets forth <br />criteria to address these special cases without the need to bring <br />each individual case back to Council. <br />Mr. Lang confirmed that he too is concerned about <br />encroachment into the 50' protected area. He said, "When we <br />cleared the site for the house, we relocated 14 trees from that <br />area into the protected area. The people buying the house want <br />to see everyone of those trees standing." <br />Bernhardson noted that these changes are not variances to <br />the Zoning Code, but are modifications to the subdivider's <br />agreement. <br />It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember <br />Goetten, to direct staff to prepare a resolution pertaining to <br />the criteria for consideration of future driveway modifications <br />and to approve a loop driveway for Lot 2, Block 2, based on <br />staff's recommendations. Mr. Maynard hoped that the motion did <br />not include approval of the resolution. Mabusth advised that <br />staff was being asked to bring back a resolution for approval. <br />Councilmember Callahan noted that the Planning Commission was <br />very instrumental in the review process of this subdivision. He is <br />- 2 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.