Laserfiche WebLink
k <br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD FEBRUARY 10, -!992 <br />I <br />r <br />v: <br />r ■> <br />r I - <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONT. <br />Mayor Pederson asked Moorse to have the Police Chief contact Mr. <br />Madge regarding his concerns. <br />Goetten reminded them that Orono is a rjral area, and agreed that <br />the Council should address Madge’s problem but did ’'ct feel a need <br />to change the ordinance. <br />(#4) #1470 & #1706 WILLIAM & EVELYN KNAPP, <br />4300 BAYSIDE ROAD - <br />PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION/PRD - RESOLUTION #3069 <br />William and Evelyn Knapp were present for this application. <br />Moorse explaim"^ *his is an application for conditional use permit <br />approval for a t for a three lot subdivision which has received <br />conceptual approval from the Council. He noted the PRD <br />Incorporates the conditions and special setbacks for the property. <br />Mabusth explained the resolution does not yet incorporate the <br />special setbacks for accessory structures. She explained that <br />because of the covenant that would restrict building within areas <br />In excess of 18% slope, two of the lots will be greatly impacted <br />and therefore it is being suggested that speciai consideration be <br />given In placing accessory structures in front of the front line <br />of the principal structure. <br />Knapp stated that the existing residence on the property would need <br />to be expanded to be in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood <br />propertIes. <br />Mabusth noted that the current code does not allow a credit for <br />dry bulldable of areas in excess of 18% slopes. The code does not <br />stated that you cannot build in such areas. She explained that <br />this condition was imposed to minimize the impact on the trees on <br />the property. She felt that a detailed survey would show areas <br />where the existing residence could be expanded wh'ch would be out <br />of the 18% slope limitation area. <br />Goetten asked why they should cirant a variance for accessory <br />structures In advance. <br />Mabusth Indicated that they were creating restricted building <br />setbacks. She noted that with a PRO is It common to create special <br />setbacks, we had already In approving 2 acre standards for the <br />proposed 2 to 3 acre pads. It should be the goal of a PRD to <br />minimize future variances. <br />lx ' .