12-12-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 2«. 1994 (#6 - #1968 • Bangcrt - Continued) The Applicant's plan calls for a driveway of 8-10% slope, entering at the east end of the lot with retaining walls to the rear. The driveway would run across the front of the property and then turn back toward the building pad. After walking the property and noting the large number of mature ttees which would be destroyed by tins plan, Gaffron has developed another possible approach to the building pad. It was suggested that the driveway come up the East side of the property to include retaining walls on both sides creating a trench-like entry into the property. Less trees would be afteaed by this plan in the 0-75' zone. The amount of retairrag walls would double, resulting in higher cost to the applicant bwt would have less v.*»ial impact from the lakeshorc. Gaft^t .n said the DNR is in favor of a lesser visual impact. The amount of hardcover in the 0-75' zone would decrease from 42% to 12% by this plan. The City Engineer has indicated both plans are feasible. Builder, Jerry Roelofe, said this plan had been considered but with the greater cut and more retaining walls, the cost would increase substantially. J^)bour noted that financial hardship cannot be taken into consideration in the decision. Roelofs said Staff s plan would the perception of a narrower lot with the deep tunnd-like cut. He is concerned with the amount of soil to be removed and the run-off in the area. Roelofs also noted the safety issue of cars using the driveway in inclement weather is more of a problem with Staffs plan There would be no safety net, i.e., a landing, to protect a car from sliding onto the roadway The applicant's plan allows for a guard rail Cook sud the applicant's plan with a driveway angle has safety benefits. Hurr asked about the plan being changed from driveway access being 20' west of the property line to now 3ff. It was commented that the original agreement with the County approved of the driveway access point in the easterly 70' of the lot. Kelley brought up the idea of acquiring an easement from a neighbor for a driveway. It was noted that the City can only recommend this option. The applicams indicated that the neighbors had been approached but neither were in favor of an easement. Hurr moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Staff recommendation resulting in the minimum variance necessary to accomplish access. Mrs. Larson, the property owner, said the County En^neers recommended the cut as their plan presents. Larson said preliminary approval had been obtained, and now Staff was presenting another plan ^ this late date. Jabbour agreed with this noting that Staff was directed to go ahead with finalizing the applicant's plan. Ayes 1. Hurr; Nays 3, Callahan, Kelley, and Jabbour. Motion failed. Jabbour moved, Callahan seconded, to adopt Resolution # 5499 to grant the variances per the resolution draft in the packets which conditionally approves applicant's plan. Ayes 3, Caflahan, Kelley, Jabbour; Nays 1. Hurr. Motion carried.