My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-20-1996 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
02-20-1996 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/10/2019 2:02:21 PM
Creation date
7/10/2019 2:02:20 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 20, 1996 <br />0 ( #1 - #2017 John O'Sullivan - Continued) <br />The question arose whether the adjacent land was a tax forfeit parcel, but Mabusth said it <br />was owned by the Lafayette Ridge Homeowner's Association and asked Mr. Larson to <br />check on the paperwork required to remove the parcel from the tax forfeiture list to <br />ownership under the association. O'Sullivan noted that the association was in support of <br />his project. Schroeder said the project only makes sense because there is only open land <br />between the extensive wetland and car wash. Mabusth said it was necessary to define the <br />elevation of the wetland area. Schroeder said the project would be based on being at least <br />26 from the wetland area. Thompson said he has based the plan on the recorded <br />information and from speaking with Glenn Cook as to the wetland elevation at 931 as <br />providing an adequate distance from the 26' wetland setback. The distance would need to <br />be verified. <br />Schroeder noted that the retention pond would provide more protection for the wetland <br />area. Mabusth agreed in that the drainage now goes to the wetland area. A letter from <br />the church noted their agreement to the easement for a holding pond and grading. <br />Mabusth said the City would ask for additional retention area within the proposed storm <br />water pond as a condition of the vacation approval. Schroeder said he would like to see <br />grass installed in the area where Navarre Lane is vacated. <br />• Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to recommend approval with the understanding <br />that the setback variance would be 30' for the car wash and a 7' variance for parking with <br />structural coverage excess approval of 5.2 %. Approval by Council would be needed for <br />allowance of a third fuel station on the intersection with buffering on the north side if <br />remaining residential. Verification of the distance to the wetland is required. A <br />verification letter regarding issues raised by Gustafson and addressed by Cook is required. <br />Navarre Lane vacation would be approved for vacation with requirement of green planting <br />areas being installed. The extent of the vacation and legal description of the church <br />property is required to complete the vacation. A retention pond would be required as <br />established by the City for the vacation with the proper easements obtained from the <br />church. <br />Hawn said she would be in support of the plan but not for the 30' setback for the car wash. <br />Smith said she was not in favor of the plan, especially in view of the car wash and new <br />construction of a very intensive project requiring variances along with the safety factors. <br />Smith said there was a possibility of a combination without the car wash. <br />0 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.