Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1W5 <br />(#2 - #2065 Marfield/HillToles - Continued) <br />Hawn withdrew her amendment to the motion. <br />Schroeder mcrv ed, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2065 to gain specific input <br />from the Fire Department and general input on the issues Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 1, <br />Rowlette, who would have liked to have voted on the amendment <br />(#J) #2000 CORTLEN G. CLOCTIER, 24SO CASCO POINT RO.AD - CLASS I <br />SUBDIVISION - CONTINUATION OF PLBLIC HEARING WITH <br />RENOTIFICATION 7:18-8:00 P.M. <br />The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. <br />The applicant was present. <br />Weckman reported that the proposal is for a two lot subdivision from property that had <br />been combined from a 3-parcel property consisting of lots I, 3, and 4 The applicant had <br />previously stated he had not intentionally combined the lots but it was done as a result of a <br />request for one tax statement The two lots meet the area and width requirements. <br />Weckman said the main issue is with the access roads on the property Lots 3 and 4 are <br />the current homestead and have access from Frederick Street. A more recent driveway <br />was established from Casco Point to the lots and is now a thru driveway with a circle. <br />The applicant said this driveway existed between 1931 and 1985, but he allowed <br />vegetation to grow over the driveway after 1985. The driveway was reestablished in <br />1994 The original subdivision shows an outlet with a drive circling around and <br />connecting to the cul-de-sac, but the drive used as the connector cuts through lot 1. <br />W'eckman asked for direction from the Commission on what to do with the driveway. <br />With the driveway serving lots 3 and 4 going through I.Jt 1, the requirement of 1/2 acre <br />contiguous on Lot I with the principal structure placed on the lot is not met. An option <br />was noted to end the driveway as shown on the drawings, or since Lot I is being sold to <br />the applicant's son, an option would be to allow the use of the driveway on a temporary <br />basis while using the adjacent two properties and nol adding an easement in favor of lots 3 <br />and 4.