My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-17-1994 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1994
>
10-17-1994 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/19/2023 3:57:44 PM
Creation date
10/19/2023 3:20:41 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.
/
415
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
Remjcst for CiHincil Action continucU <br />page 2 of 5 <br />October 6. 1994 <br />Zoning File #1967 <br />Application Background <br />Applicants had initially included tlie adjacent Irvin Getfre property at 4665 <br />Bayside in a profx>sed plat to create five new building sites. <br />Applicants worked with staff regarding road layout and septic retjuiremenis for <br />that proposal and concluded that only four new lots would be possible. <br />Concurrently. K-P Properties has been attempting to acquire the Fred and David <br />White acreage to the immediate west, but have been unsuccessful to-date, <br />although such ? transaction is still being pursued. <br />Rather than proceed with the four lot subdivision, just prior to the Planning <br />Commission meeting plicants revised the proposal to merely splitting off the <br />Olson residence and leaving the remaining Olson acreage for development later <br />this year or early next year. <br />Applicants consulted with staff to accomplish such a subdivision that would not <br />leave the remaining acreage landlocked, and which would result in the e.xisting <br />residetKc requiring no variances regardless of whether a future subdivision <br />iKcurs. <br />Planning Commission Denial Recommendation <br />Planning Comtnis.don reviewed the conceptual information provided by the applican- and staff s <br />concerns (see memt> ot 9M5/94). Given the lack of septic testing and only having conceptual <br />sketches rather than the formal survey work to review. Planning Commission ottered applicant <br />tabling or denial. Applicant requested a denial in order to move this along to the Council since <br />Mr. Olson and the buver of his house wish to close on the property as soon as possible. <br />Planning Commission suggested that applicant work with staff to prepare a subdivision plan tor <br />presentation to Council <br />Outlots Intended for Future Development <br />Staff advised applicants tliat spliumg off the res idence lot must not leave the remaining acreage <br />landlocked. Potential access to the remaining 14 acres is through Lot 1 or from Bayside through <br />While's property, which applicants don't control. <br />1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.