My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-16-1997 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1997
>
06-16-1997 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/6/2023 8:47:18 AM
Creation date
9/6/2023 8:40:23 AM
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.
/
361
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 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 19, 1991 <br />(#1)ZONING FILE #1619-WHITEHEAD CONTINUED <br />Looking at page four, Mike comments on the need for a <br />temoorarv cul-de-sac. I would really argue against that. I do <br />not understand the need for it, and it would be necessary to <br />remove a great number of trees in order to construct a <br />cul-de-sac. Any tvpe of cul-de-sac would be environmentally <br />damaging and may affect an existing drainage swale that runs <br />through that area. As Mike notes, a temporary cul-de-sac may <br />eliminate one lot. We are hoping to construct a new home for <br />ourselves and really need three lots. <br />I do not believe there should be concern regarding the curve <br />radius because no one drives 30 miles per hour on this road. We <br />would be hapoy to post the road at whatever speed the City <br />recommends. We would strongly urge the City to give us a <br />Variance on the 275' radius requirement. <br />states that no subdivision shall be approved unless the area has <br />access to a private roadway open to traffic. We do have access <br />from a private roadway for all of these lots in a manner that <br />complies with your Code. <br />With respect to septic sites, Mike notes that there is some <br />discrepancy about the allowed slope percent. Most of the sites <br />have 6% slope, a few have 7% oi *%. I do not believe that septic <br />sites are an issue. <br />Lastly, I believe that the 30' front setback proposed for <br />Lot 1 is necessary because of the topography." <br />Dick Cornwall. 1200 Lyman Avenue, stated that hs endorses <br />Mr Whitehead's comments concerning the uniqueness of the area. <br />He said, "We would very much like to see the unique environment <br />preserved. The discussion about the road upgrading and possible <br />cul-de-sac is disturbing to us. We prefer the small gravel road. <br />The only comment I care to make is that this boils <br />choosing among the lesser evils. The least evil of the <br />cul-de-sac alternatives is the middle location on the corner <br />the Whiteheads' property. I have adjacent land <br />that I would be willing to discuss contributing for that kind or <br />solution." <br />Brian Palmer, 1190 Lyman Avenue, also expressed concern <br />can be done to maintain the character of that area should be <br />- 4 -
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.