My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-13-1995 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1995
>
11-13-1995 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2023 2:47:53 PM
Creation date
10/6/2023 2:37:15 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.
/
599
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
mr MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONMSSIONMEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 16, 1995 <br />(#8 - #2065 Scotch Pine Lane - Continued) <br />Marfidd read these findings into the minutes and are part <br />Scotch Pine is the one 3-lo, cul.Je-s.c that drains into <br />year effort to sain the grass and trees back to the property. i •t « th^ nublic <br />^t^^e-sTc with o^t in two parts divided by a toad. Due to tts ^ <br />is attraaed to the road in order to gain access to the lake, yet in <br />all three cppBcants are supportive of the proposal. He also note a ? <br />!be area have more than one driveway access, where these propetttes have only the one <br />access. <br />Gaf&on said another standard issue is with 3 lots currently <br />Marfield’s property will abut only an outlot. Gaffron t s cr ^ ^ <br />coiifiguration. He also noted the lot size being substandard with 1 <br />zoi^iog. <br />L area ^rL^ed back to crass. Engineers revew would be required pnor to <br />presentation to the Council. <br />Gafiron said the neichbors to the east, the Levy's, ask for a 15' f back for the new <br />j • car tn thf Toles orouenv Gaffiron said this was not a code requirement excepuh <br />rS i= nonnally allowed within 5' of the lot line. Tolcs sdd he would honor thts <br />request. <br />Ga&on voiced concern over the possibility of setting a Precedent by approving a proposal <br />w^h is in contrast to what is being currently asked of other subdivisions. <br />r ffi-nn noted that CoRd 51 is defined in the Comprehensive Plan as a parkway, which <br />Gafiron not coUeaor roads does not require new lots to use an <br />funaions as a comorehensive plan suesests that this be done when it is possible. <br />Son fodScdfoe Planning c;nu™ss.on sh'ould make specific finduica of uniqueness d <br />they approved the proposal. <br />5.. <br />\
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.