07-17-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNflSSION MEETING HELD ON JUNT 19, 1995 (#5) #2020 JAMES BRUCE, 565 LEAF STREET - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - CONTINUATION OF PUBUC HEARING 7:00-7:49 P.M. Mr. Bruce was present. The application was tabled at the last Planning Commission meeting sut^ect to applicant submitting an amendment of the cov enants of the Stielow Addition. The application is for a three-lot subdivision with a lot line rearrangement. The lot line rearrangement will provide the additional area needed to fiilfill area requirements for 3 lot division. Lots 1 and 2 will be accessed from Oxford Road, which is a private road, with Lot 3 served by public road The accessory structure on Lot 3 will be removed prior to final plat application. The Engineer has asked for a 15’ sewer utility easement aloi^ north lot line of Lot I to serve the church property to the east. There had been public concern over tree removal with the house pad location on Lot 1 Bruce said he has not changed the property's house pad location. Bruce did meet with the neighbors to the north, who have a swimming pool located 50-60* from the property line. Bruce said the neighbor was concerned over impact on the users of the swimming pool. A neighborhood meeting was held regarding the covenant bylaws It was found that tte property owner to the north’s only desire was not to be able to see a house from their property, but gained no support from others, as they felt this was unreasonable. As far as the tree removal issue is concerned, Bruce said he would agree to plant pine trees. The Nelson's, the neighbors to the north, were not convinced that this solved the issue, but did agree, according to Bruce, that the buildup pad fits into the normal setback. Peterson clarified with Mabusth that the covenant amendment was signed and meets the required issues for this property’s subdivision. Bruce said the covenant was established in 1978, and this would be the third time the covenant has been amended. Mabusth said a width variance is required for Lot 3 due to narrowness of land at 199.98 feet rather than the 200 feet required. The appticam is asking for a vacation of the existing easement over the drainageway in Lot 1. The Engineer has reviewed this request and noted it can be redesignated to 20', where 40* had been dedicated in the originai plat. Mabusth said this was an ambitious designation and is not needed. Mabusth advised that applicant proposes no change in drainageway. 8 _____