12-10-1990 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE #1334 - REBERS CONTINUED be a review process. If the Planning Commission is to be the • sole reviewing body, we feel that the draft resolution should be revised. We are uncomfortable with the language and believe that the five items listed are too loosely worded. With the exception of item #1, all other items should be tightened up. It is precisely these problems that we are seeing over and over again. The Planning Commission is concerned that a house is being designed first and then, after all the money and effort is put into design, a representation is made that there is only one location for a driveway. That puts everyone in a difficult position. The Planning Commission believes that the review process ought to take place sufficiently early in the design process to allow the opportunity for change. If the Planning Commission does not find there to be adequate reasons for a house to placed as presented, we reserve the right to ask the builder to start over. We are asking that at least the Planning Commission review these requests and that we are not having the review at a point where nothing else can be done." Mr. Pflaum clarified that if Council agrees to have only the Planning Commission review these requests, that the abbreviated process would be limited only to requests for driveway locations. He said, "I believe Council suggested this review method as a compromise to having only City Staff review these requests. My client does not have any objection to any language changes that the Planning Commission may wish to make. It is my understanding • that the Planning Commission would lice to use their own initiative to determine whether there is sufficient criteria to warrant deviating from the straight, 20 -foot wide driveway. We are very comfortable with tailoring the language in the resolution to meet the concerns of the Planning Commission. The process is requested by the applicant and will speed up the approval process of at least driveways. There are three separate builders in this subdivision. Our main concern is that once they have obtained a customer, they want the building design and permit process to occur as quickly as possible. One of the resolutions presented this evening would shorten the review ' process of driveways." Callahan said, "The Planning Commission is an advisory body. If they insist that it is their duty to advise on each of these driveway requests, individually, then I can s•ay, as a Councilmember, it is my duty to decide on each individually. Consequently, unfortunate as it may be, I cannot permit this to go without passing on each case individually." Goetten stated that she had initially supported the suggestion of having only the Planning Commission review these requests. She said, "Pe -haps it is premature to consider that. It may be appropriate to do some revising of the Planning Commission agenda, as far as what they can and cannot do, before - 3 - •