Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 16, 1998 <br /> • <br /> SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING <br /> (#6) #2430 PAUL PHILLIPS PROPOSES A TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION OF A 4.5 ACRE PARCEL <br /> LOCATED AT 2140 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH, 7:13 p.m. -7:35 p.m. <br /> The Applicant was present. <br /> Van Zomeren stated this application appeared before the Planning Commission at its October <br /> meeting as a sketch plan. The Applicant is proposing a subdivision of his homestead property which <br /> is situated on a 4.5 acre lot. The proposed division would create a new lot along Sixth Avenue North <br /> with each lot being comprised of 2.0 acres served by an outlot. There are primary and secondary <br /> septic sites for each parcel. <br /> Van Zomeren stated at the previous meeting there were concerns regarding front lot/back lot issues, <br /> but with the proposed plan, the property would have access from an outlot, which may eliminate the <br /> front lot/back lot concern. The subdivision ordinance requires that a separate outlot be platted to <br /> serve three lots. The outlot as platted does not include a cul-de-sac, which has been recommended <br /> by the City Engineer for emergency purposes. The Long Lake Fire Department has been sent a copy <br /> of the preliminary plat for review and comment. <br /> Paul Phillips stated he has no comments. <br /> There were no public comments. <br /> Chair Smith inquired whether the circle driveway could serve as a cul-de-sac and accommodate <br /> • emergency vehicles. <br /> Stoddard inquired what necessitates the need for a cul-de-sac. <br /> Van Zomeren stated three residences are needed for a cul-de-sac. <br /> Gaffron remarked that in a similar application on Watertown Road a cul-de-sac and 50 foot road was <br /> platted but not built. <br /> Lindquist commented that a lot of the cul-de-sacs do not get constructed. Lindquist inquired whether <br /> the Applicant has a problem with adding a cul-de-sac. <br /> Phillips stated he does not as long as he does not need to build it. Phillips remarked this driveway <br /> would only be serving two residences. <br /> Lindquist suggested the Applicant revise the plat to include the cul-de-sac. <br /> Van Zomeren stated the cul-de-sac may affect the building pad for one of the lots, noting that an <br /> independent surveyor will need to plat the cul-de-sac for the Applicant. <br /> Hawn commented that perhaps a cul-de-sac is called for. <br /> Phillips stated if the cul-de-sac is mandatory and land is taken from either one or both of the lots, <br /> the lots might then not meet the two acre minimum. <br /> Chair Smith commented that it appears the Planning Commission is saying that a cul-de-sac will <br /> • probably be necessary. <br /> Page 5 <br />