My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-25-1996 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1996
>
03-25-1996 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/31/2023 4:15:25 PM
Creation date
8/31/2023 4:10:51 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.
/
265
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 FEBRUARY 20. 1996 <br />(#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 .Nlr. 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 trom 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 tor a holding pond and grading. <br />Mabusth said the City would ask for additional retention area within the proposed stonn <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 T 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 ot 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 trom the <br />church <br />Hawn sa’d she would be in support of the plan but not for the 30' setback tor the car wash. <br />Smith said she was not in favor of the plan, especially in view ot the car wash and new <br />construction of a v ery intensive project requiring variances along with the safety factors. <br />Smith said there was a possibility of a combination without the car wash. <br />If
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.