My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-27-1994 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1994
>
06-27-1994 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2023 9:00:24 AM
Creation date
12/11/2023 8:54:08 AM
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.
/
252
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
r <br />Zoning File i»1933 <br />June 16, 1994 <br />Page 4 <br />this issue durinu the first phase review, probably, because we were too involved with Sacred <br />I^nd issues and public vs. private trail ownership. It is not clear whether the interior trail was <br />even designated on preliniinarv’ plans reviewed by Planning Commission during first pha.se <br />review'. Why can't trail be relocated aw'ay from wetlands'.’ <br />Septic <br />Please review E.xhibit D. Weekman notes all 21 lots have been found to have suitable <br />area for primary' and alternate drainfield sites suitable lor a tive-bedroom home. <br />Roads <br />Applicant proposes a cul-de-sac road accessing at Willow Drive to serve the second phase <br />Dickey parcel. The Coffin parcel will be served also by a cul-de-sac road and private driveway <br />outlot serving Lots 16 and 17. Note the City has already approved the back lot configurations <br />for Lots 6 and 7. <br />The developer is once again advised that if cul-de-sac roads are proposed, they shall <br />remain privately maintained by benefitting propeny owners consistent with the City's policy. <br />Other issues raised bv the Planning Commission <br />Any condition of approval should include the following conditions: <br />Recommendation must provide supportive findings approving the back lot <br />configurations for Lots 16 and 17 finding them not to ha\e been a convenience <br />to the developer but based on findings supporting environmental and aesthetic <br />concerns for the development. <br />Will Planning Commission recommend setback variances for encroachment of wetlands <br />bv interior trails.’ If so. list applicant’s hardships. <br />Lot width variances for Lots 15 and 18 would be consistent when lots abut cul-de-sac. <br />The following conditions are recommended by staff: <br />1.Cul-de-sac roads on Coffin and Dickey parcels shall be private. The City shall <br />obtain underlying road and utility easements. The developer shall develop private <br />covenants for the maintenance of private roads. .Applicant should also address the <br />ownership of Outlot C. whether that shall be a shared ownership. If not. then <br />one owner shall be responsible for granting an easement to the second owner.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.