Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
• <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 16, 1995 <br />( #15 - #2077 Replat and Vacation - Continued) <br />Mabusth reviewed the street vacation application. Parcel A, the Knight property, is <br />located in the LR -1B zone within the MUSA. Knight could ask for sewering of this <br />property as well as subdivide with as many as three lots. If vacation of the only two public <br />accesses to this property is approved, the City must provide access to a public road. The <br />City approved a lot area variance for Lots 14, Block 3. <br />Mabusth said she met with the applicants and found that it may be possible to maintain <br />public access from Linden but with the loss of one small lot. The applicant would give 50' <br />so there would be no need to enter the Bennett property. If a cul -de -sac were to be built, <br />there were several options as to the location. Mabusth said Bennett indicated he would <br />withdraw his application if required to dedicate a cul -de -sac. 20 additional feet will be <br />sought for Linden Avenue. <br />The Planning Commissioners had questioned whether a loop road would be an alternative <br />in this subdivision. Mabusth said the applicants would lose the whole purpose for the <br />replat if they went to that configuration. It is the applicants plan for Lots 1 and 2 to share <br />access up to where Clyde Place is to be vacated and then branch off to their individual <br />homes. Lot 3 would continue to gain access as it does now. <br />• Schroeder asked if the problem with Bennett giving any private dedication was that there <br />was no benefit to his property. He suggested that Knight cut through the easement to give <br />the benefit to Bennett. Knight responded that he did not wish to do so as the aesthetics of <br />the driveway with driving through a canopy of trees would be lost. Schroeder said the <br />alternate would be the cul -de -sac should Knight subdivide. <br />Lindquist clarified that the City needs to provide an opportunity for public access to <br />Knight. <br />Hawn asked if there was not a grandfathering of the existing easement for ingress and <br />egress if Knight were to subdivide. Honmeyer said it would not meet the requirement for <br />public roads. It was suggested that some land be purchased from Bennett. The applicants <br />said they would desire for this to happen. Knight noted that this is why he recommends <br />no action taken until all parties can discuss the applications. <br />Honmeyer said if land could be purchhsed from Bennett, Knight would have his access. <br />50' is needed for the access but the properties would be dealing with more intense use in <br />the future. There is a possibile division of three lots on the Knight property. Honmeyer <br />said he would wish to keep the back portion of the property as buildable. <br />0 Lindquist acknowledged that access to the Knight property would need to be worked out. <br />22 <br />