My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-28-1993 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1993
>
06-28-1993 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2024 11:25:34 AM
Creation date
1/5/2024 11:20:34 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.
/
482
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
ro: <br />From: <br />Date: <br />Subject: <br />Mayor Callahan & Orono Councilmembers <br />Ron Moorse, City Administrator <br />Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator <br />June 10, 1993 <br />#1825 Thomas L. McCarthy, 2490 Old Beach Road - Preliminar>' Subdivision, <br />Class III <br />Additional Exhibits <br />I - Amended Hardcover Facts Submitted for Lot 1 Under Alternative B <br />Brief Review of Application <br />The proposed two-lot subdivision is the first subdivision of a lakeshore property under <br />the new Shoreland Regulations. The property consists of a little over two acres. The applicant <br />provided two alternative plans for development. Review E.xhibits G and H. Alternate A was <br />immediately set aside as it would have involved an area variance for proposed Lot 2. Easement <br />areas must be deducted from the area of a proposed lot. The new Shoreland Regulations would <br />now allow flag lots as lot widths are measured in a straight line at both shoreland and at the 75' <br />setback line. <br />The major issue for this review has been the excess of hardcover within the 250-500’ <br />setback area resulting from the impact of driveway hardcover on the narrow 20’ corridor to <br />roadway. As this was the first subdivision application under the new Shoreland Regulations, we <br />have no previous policies to base a recommendation. Staff suggested that Planning Commission <br />consider the area between the 75-500’ setback for deternmiing allowed hardcover. Total area <br />would now be at 29,700 s.f. and would be allowed 7,425 s.f. or 25% hardcover. The Planning <br />Commission felt uncomfortable making any recommendation coiiceming this issue and felt it <br />more appropriate for Council to make the final decision. <br />The Planning Commission denied the application based on the fact that a hardcover <br />excess existed within the 250-500’ setback area and that the Planning Commission would not <br />recommend approval of a subdivision where a variance was required. <br />Review Exhibits H and I. The applicant has submitted a revised hardcover proposal <br />for proposed Lot 1. Lot coverage is reviewed as follows: <br />Alternate B - Lot 1 <br />0-75’ setback area = 14.000 s.f. <br />Allowed = 0 s.f. <br />Proposed = 0 s.f.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.