02-22-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 22,1995 Smith confirmed the retaining walls were to be repaired with no changes. Nolan asked the purpose of the underground walkway and retaining wall. Crawford explained it was the entrance to the root cellar and basement of the greenhouse and the only outside access to the greenhouse Schroeder asked why the grass drive did not work. Crawford responded that service and maintenance vehicles that would use the drive would cause it to continually require grass replacement It would be used to access the back areas of the home including the gardens, tennis courts and pool Peterson asked why the grass had not been tom up over the years as repairs had been done on a regular basis. Crawford responded the pool was located in a different area. Mabusth reiterated Peterson's comments that much of the hardcover in the 0-75' zone was approved because of the fact that there was only about 17% in the 75-250’ zone. Nolan noted that only necessary items, not items of convenience, should be considered for the 0-75' zone. He agreed with the walking path and retaining wall but questioned the drive. Schroeder asked if other options had been considered for the 10' drive such as two asphalt paths with grass between Mabusth asked about the possibility of connecting a drive to the main driveway instead of using another curb cut She did not feel members were convinced there was a hardship to support a variance for the portion of the drive in the 0-75' zone. Smith asked about the septic system issue. Mabusth stated a date is required for the installation of a new septic system since the study on areas to be considered for sewer has been completed and the Bracketts Point area will not be sewered. She asked that Crawford submit a written statement with a date indicated for installation Crawford responded that the owners were reviewing information regarding sewer and septic and may petition the City for sewer. Mabusth noted that sewer to this property would require a Comp Plan Amendment and would take a long time. There were no comments from the public. Nolan moved, Peterson seconded, to deny Application #1992 as proposed. Discussion continued regarding the proposed variances. Nolan commented that if the 10' drive were removed from the 0-75' zone, there would be no need for a variance for the drive. He did not object to the remaining variances. Peterson commented that the Planning Commission has denied repair of boathouses in the lakeshore protected area and the greenhouse repair is a similar situation. Mabusth noted the uniqueness of the property and the hardship for the retaining wall at the greenhouse being the only grade level access. Schroeder would prefer to see the drive connect to the niain driveway rather than use the 0-75' zone. Mabusth indicated an amended plan would be necessary showing there was no increase in hardcover as a result of road paving in the 0-75' area. The applicant could choose to put the drive into grass or connect to the main driveway.