My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-26-1999 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
1997-1999
>
1999
>
04-26-1999 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/6/2023 4:20:07 PM
Creation date
4/6/2023 4:14:22 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
330
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
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR APRIL 12,1999 <br />(#9) U2466 James Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road - Continued <br />Renckens said this parcel has a lot of appeal. He is concerned about the future development <br />of the area if the outlot is made into a road. He does not want to be in a busy area. <br />Sansevere asked about the septic alternatives if the 50 ’ outlot is created. <br />Renckens said the septic site is in the northeast comer of the site. He said the alternative is to <br />remove the trees in the middle of the site. The only other septic site is near the wetland. The <br />wetland has to be extended with a ponding area which will eliminate that septic site. <br />Kelley asked staff how access would be gained to Watertown Road if the property was <br />subdivided further. <br />Weinberger stated that only two residences are allowed on a shared private driveway. Access <br />for the northerly lot would have to be via the cul-de-sac on Crystal Creek Road. <br />Mike Hilbelink stated that none of the property owners in the area are in favor of the 50 ’ <br />outlot except for Mr. Carlson. He said the City didn’t take the outlot at the time of the Crystal <br />Creek Subdivision and it appears to him that the reason was to preserve septic sites and two <br />lots for Mr. Carlson. Mr. Hilbelink feels Mr. Carlson will benefit from the outlot and the <br />burden is being put on the person developing this parcel. He said if this parcel had already <br />been developed at the time of the Crystal Creek Subdivision, the outlot w’ould have had to go <br />to the north and Mr. Carlson would have lost two lots. <br />Carlson stated that the road was put where City staff wanted it put. He was promised a 50 ’ <br />outlot across the top of the Stubbs property and he wants it. <br />Flint asked about Mr. Carlson creating his own problem when he sold off Lots 6 and 7 since <br />that is what isolated his northern property. <br />Carlson said Lots 6 and 7 were part of the entire plat and there weren’t any problems with <br />septic sites. He again stated that he put the road where the City wanted it and he does not <br />want to be denied access to his 30 acres. <br />I <br />Hilbelink said this parcel could be sold and not subdivided. If that happened, the outlot could <br />not be created. <br />Kelley asked if Gaffron was involved in the Crystal Creek subdivision. <br />Gaffron said he had some involvement in the subdivision. <br />Kelley asked what the staffs position was from a long-term planning point of view. <br />Page 13
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.