Laserfiche WebLink
t <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON MAY 15. 1995 <br />(#12 - #2019 Leisel Cox - Continued) <br />Mabusth informed the members that the application was for a conditional use permit for a <br />Class 1 restaurant in the Overson Building. The Keaveny property is to the immediate <br />east of this property. Mr. Keaveny was present and still owns that building. <br />Mabusth showed the survey of the building and the parking, w’hich has 28 stalls. Mr. <br />Keaveny confirmed that there was no shared docking or parking areas. Cook said the <br />parking will still be workable after improvements on CoRd 15 is completed. Nolan <br />questioned if it was appropriate to ask for a cenain number of parking stalls. Mabusth did <br />not believe this was necessary, noting there was never a parking problem at this propeny. <br />The site plans call for a coffee shop type restaurant serving espressos, sandwiches, and <br />soups. Peterson said the CUP application is consistent with the use. <br />Simth moved, Nolan seconded, to approve Application #2019 for a conditional use permit <br />to include the three recommendations. Aves 5, Navs 0. <br />Mabusth added a third condition to the application. There is now one bathroom. <br />Separate bathrooms must be provided for men and women. <br />(#13) SKETCH PLAN REVIEW - #1800 MICHAEL PLANK, 4115 WATERTOWN <br />ROAD - REQUEST FOR CONCEPTUAL DIRECTION FROM PLANNING <br />COMMISSION <br />Michael Plank was present. <br />Gaflfron reported that approval had been originally given in February of 1993; but through <br />an apparent miscommunication, final exhibits were never submitted by the applicant. <br />Consequently, the applicant never went before the Council and expired in February of <br />1994. The backlot ordinance was adopted since the original approval, and anv new <br />subdivisions after January of 1994 need to meet the current standards. An example of <br />how that affects this application is the requirement for 150^0 of the lot area and width. <br />Gaffron stated that at this time, this is a sketch plan review and requires no formal vote. <br />In way of background, prior to 1988 this property wa.s a 25 acre parcel. In 1988, it was <br />subdivided into three lots and a 30' width access outlot. Approval was given for the <br />shared use of tlie driveway outlot for the new house on Lot 3 and a second lot which <br />might be split from it in the future. In 1993, preliminary approval was given to rearrange <br />the boundary between Lots 2 and 3, leaving 6.2 acres with the house on Lot 3 and 13.6*” <br />acres with the house on Lot 2. Plank then would have the ability to seU the house on Lot <br />3 but maLitain control of the outlot and enough acreage for a possible split in the future.