Laserfiche WebLink
^^rNUTES OF THE ORONO PL.ANNTNG COMNCSSION <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 <br />(#2 - #2065 Marfidd/Hiil/Toles - Continued) <br />Hav*Ti withdrew her amendment to the morion. <br />Schrocder moved. Lindquist seconded, to table Application ^2065 to gain specinc input <br />from the Fire Department and general input on the issues. Vote; Ayes Nays 1, <br />Rowlette, who would have liked to have voted on the amendment. <br />(#3) #2000 CORTLEN G. CLOUTIER. 2480 CASCO POINT ROAD - CLASS I <br />SUBDIVISION - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING WITH <br />RENOTIFICATION 7:18-8:00 P..\L <br />The Certificate of Mailing and .Afiida\-it 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 1, 3, and 4. The applicant had <br />previously stated he had not intentionally combined the lots but it was done as a result oi 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 j and 4 are <br />the current homestead and have access from Frederick Street. A more recent dnyeway <br />was established from Casco Point to the lots and is now a thru dnveway with a circle. <br />The applicant said this driveway existed between 1931 and 1985, but he allowe^ <br />vegetation to grow over the driveway after 1985. The driveway n^as reestabbshed m <br />1994. The original subdivision shows an outlot 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 />Weckman asked for direction from the Commission on what to do with the driveway. <br />With the driveway serving lots 3 and 4 going through Lot 1, the requirement of 1/2 acre <br />contiguous on Lot 1 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 1 is being sold to <br />the appUcanfs son, an option would be to aUow the use of the driveway on a temper^ ^ <br />basis while using the adjacent tw o properties and not adding an easement m favor of lots j <br />and 4.