Laserfiche WebLink
f <br />ORONO OTY COUNCIL MEETING <br />minutes for APRIL 12,1999 <br />(#8)#2^5Roberf£ <br />Resolunbn No. ^6( <br />7lrickson4t4 and 312 Westlal/'Street - Lot^nc Rearran ;ement - <br />ded, to api rove ^pplicationyp2465,364 and 3 <br />Approving ^ Sul^* <br />Kelley moved, Sansevere secoL ^ <br />lcfy.rianps/..Muj-4lC.deSejW <br />ivUion of a Lot <br />Granting <br />of yanancesito Municips <br />SuDdhision A6(Q(M; si' <br />^ysO. ^ \7 <br />Section <br />ag if a PortiMd Closiiig if a PortiM of WeVt^e Street. <br />ction'^0^6, ^ <br />Ayes 4, <br />(#9) #2466 James Renckens, having an interest in 3020 Watertown Road - 2 Lot <br />Preliminary Subdivision <br />James Renckens and John Winston, applicants, were present. <br />Renckens said he objects to the requirement that two outlots be created. He is concerned <br />about the availability of septic sites if the outlots arc created. He said the site is rollmg ^d <br />high *0 thβ€œ no*^^ rollJno in the middle and there is a wetland m the middle. The parcel is <br />difficult to develop. He would like to build his home on the northern part of the property. <br />There is one septic site in the northeast comer that he would like to use as a pnm^ site and <br />it would be eliminated by the 50’ outlot. He said the ambiance of that comer is what atoacted <br />them to the property and that would be mined if a road is installed. He requested that the <br />Council eliminate the requirement for the outlots. <br />Mayor Jabbour unseated himself for this item. <br />John Winston said his property abuts the northeastern part of the parcel. He and his neighbors <br />onnose the 50’ outlot across the northern boundary. They are not interested m connec mg <br />Wear Lane to Crystal Creek Road. He said the original proposal for this parcel WM a <br />subdivision for five lots. This proposal is for two loU. He feels the low densi^ is importmt <br />and that the outiots are not necessary. He said they are not proposmg any roadway, only a <br />driveway corridor at the southwesterly comer of the parcel. He would like β€œ <br />character of this property that blends with the neighborhoods to *e east and the west He said <br />there is property to the north that could possibly be developed. He does not feel that Mr. <br />Renckens should have to provide access to that property by creatmg Outlot B. <br />Sansevere asked staff why the ouUots were made a contingency of approval. <br />Weinberger stated that the proposal creates a front lot and a b«k lot situation. The <br />subdivision ordinance does not allow a flag lot to be created. The back lot is reqimed to have <br />150% of the zoning district requirements and the lot does meet those requueinents. The <br />zoning code only dlows access to be granted to that property throng a platted outlot ^e <br />disadvantage for the property owners in this situation is the <br />for the lot area as part of lot 1, although the entire outlot would be m their ownership. The <br />Page 9