My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-15-1995 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1995
>
05-15-1995 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/27/2023 3:33:22 PM
Creation date
9/27/2023 3:28:27 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.
/
253
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
Zoning File #:022 <br />May 11 1995 <br />Page 4 <br />Wetland/Drainage <br />The City will ask that ihe designafed wetland be shown as drainage easements on the plat. <br />As in an earlier subdivision application, the Types 1 and 2 weUands not already designat^ on <br />the City's Wetlands Maps shall be protected with private covenants similar to the ones deve oped <br />for the* Old Crystal Bay Road Addition. This wUl involve Lots 1, 2 and 3. The City will ask <br />for 10’ wide drainage and utility easements along the perimeters of the property and 5 along <br />the shared lot lines.'^The designation of utilities may be omitted where wetlands arc adjacent to <br />the lot lines. <br />Other Issues <br />If the City is asked to grant variances so that this fcu-lot plat may be developed without <br />segments reduced because of the location of tested septic areas. In these areas <br />be removed or stnicmres installed. Suff would ask that Members conside. expanding the buffer <br />area to include the 30 ’ side setbacks. Staff docs not want the City to enter into such covei^ <br />with the developer as this proved to be a major problem for the City with the covenants of the <br />Sugar Woods subdivision. The value of this property and the uniqueness of this property results <br />from this mamre-forested area being retained. Clearcutting of trees would devalue the property. <br />Applicant’s covenants must encourage maintaining the trees and restricting removal. Covenants <br />must define under what conditions a tree may be removed within the buffer area. <br />Recommendation of Approval <br />Any recommendation of approval of this four-lot subdivision would have to be <br />based on the final resolve of access to this property. If the Council does not amend tlK C^ <br />and refuses to grant itself variances for an additional residential curb cut on the City dnveway, <br />then applicant must file a new plat with the City providing an internal road. If an internal road <br />is required, then the City can no longer ask for special buffer areas as a condmon of ^rovmg <br />the variance. The City has no ordinances that restrict the removal of trees except for those areas <br />within the 0-75 ’ setback of the shoreline of a lake or on steep slopes. The followmg conditions <br />would apply to the current four-lot piop-^sal: <br />1. Dedication of 33 ’ of ught-of-way for the County road. <br />2.Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10’ wi^ along the perimeter <br />boundaries of the property and 5’ along the shared lot lines.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.