My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-12-1996 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1996
>
02-12-1996 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/31/2023 3:52:18 PM
Creation date
8/31/2023 3:47:36 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.
/
513
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
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 <br />(#1 - #2064 Robert Olson/lrvin Geffi'e - Continued) <br />The proposed lot line does not preclude the use of the Outlot corridor tor a future <br />roadway. To meet code and not impact future development, an option is to come down <br />the west side of the properties requiring a 50' corridor, which will not be limited by the ot <br />line rearrangement. The City is requesting vacation of the utility and drainage easement^ <br />Minnegasco has no interest in this being done. NSP, thru a verbal communication, as e <br />that the electrical lines not be vacated. This would need to be confirmed. New dedication <br />of drainage and utility easements is proposed to be required along the new lot boundary. <br />Recarding the oversize accessory structure square footage variances, Gaflfron asked the <br />Commissioners if GeflBre should be required to remove the smaller shed or quonset to <br />minimize the amount of accessory structures. <br />It was noted that both applicants were present at the meeting. <br />Lindquist asked what the uses were for the quonset and other shed. The quonset, which <br />would be on the new lot, is used for storage. The applicant would consider removing this <br />structure. The other shed is used for garden tools. The applicant requested maintaining <br />this small shed. The quonset is 1014 s.f, and its removal would reduce the variance to <br />768 s.f <br />Peterson commented that Outlot C at 14 acres was large enough to consider moving <br />proposed rear lot line further south into Outlot C. The applicant responded that it would <br />not be a problem to change the lot line 20’ more to the south. When questioned by <br />Peterson whether the lot line change would affect the future road, Gaflron said it would <br />not affect the future road. <br />Gaffron noted that as part of variance approval, the City should require the standard <br />oversize accessory structure covenant stipulating that Geflfre's lot size cannot be decreased <br />by a future division without requiring the removal of the oversize accessory structure. <br />Rowlette asked that a date for the quonset removal be noted in the resolution. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Peterson noted that there would be no impact on any neighbors. <br />Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2064 with <br />the removal of the quonset 60 days from the final date of approval, an additional 20' be <br />added to the south end of the lot, a covenant placed on the property requiring the removal <br />of the oversize accessory structure if the lot is made smaller, and new drainage and utility <br />easement be granted. Vacation of the e.xistmg easement will be approved subjea to <br />confirmation of the interest of NSP. .Ayes 6, Nays 0.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.