04-15-1996 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#10 - #2119 Bamett/Hilloway Sketch Plan Review - Continued) C^nberg asked if the septic site be located in lot 5 if theie would be the need to meet the 2(W* setback for the frontage noting the 1T taken from the lot for right-of-way. Mabusth said the Commission would need to decide if they would allow that variance. Gronbcrg agreed that the access was unsafe to that lot. Mabusth said there was also the issue of number of lots if the internal road was built. There is 8 acres on the north between lots I -4. Gronberg said there would be a problem with the steepness of the slope on the east lot line, and it would require fill. Gustafson was informed that the road would be a private road built to City standards. Gustafron said the road would be allowed up to a 12% grade, though 10% would be preferred. Jim Pfennig of Hilloway was informed that a private road can be used by another homeowner through an underlying public easement. This would allow the adjacent land owners use but remain private. Mabusth said the costs involved in maintaining the road would be shared and could have an introductory fee but it would be decided with a private maintenance agreement resolved by property owners. Pfennig was concerned that an internal road would destroy the look of the lots and would like an additional curb cut for lot 2. Smith said a shared driveway could be used. Mabusth noted that the County may not approve an additional curb cut. Gustaf»n said there was good site distance, if kept far enough away from the intersection, but it would require following County jurisdiction. Mabusth asked if the internal road was possible and whether it could go beyond the Gefire property. Gustafson suggested putting together different options on what is or is not feasible in determining the road's location. Gustafwn said the parcel does have the acceptable location for access road but questioned whether it was desirable to have all of the lots achieve access from internal road. Irv Wackman was in the audience. Wackman said he has a purchase agreement to purchase the property to the east and is curious about the road situation. It is his intent to build one home at this time and has no current plans to subdivide. Peterson reviewed that the issues for the sketch plan pertained to septic sites, wetlands, and the roadwav. Mabusth noted the limited area in the northern part of the parcel. Peterson and Smith said they would be willing to consider a lot width variance for an internal road. They were undecided on a variance if a backlot was created. Gronberg commented that with a cul-de-sac, parcels usually do not meet the 200* requirement and are routinely granted a variance. «■ • i .... .A