11-13-1990 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE 11555-LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED Goetteri esked whether the road issue could be separated from the subdivision. She said, "I cannot see a cul-do-sac being placed at the end of the road. Ho\/ever, I am also against curb and gutter for this particular road." Bernhardson stated that Council could opt to approve the subdivision without curb and gutter and require the developer to share in the cost of the overlay. Goetten asked what the overlay Mill cost. Staff did not know at this point what the cost of overlay will be. Cook said. "Council could i .djcate that the developer would have to share in whatever that couc is determined to be." Goetten stated that she would prefer to know that information prior to approval and that the developer should also know. It was moved by Goetten to approve the pceliminary subdivision as recommended by Staff and Planning Commission, without consideration for the road. The m:?tion failed due to a lack of a second. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles for the purpose of discussion, to approve the preliminary subdivision in accordance with the resolution presented this evening, which includes curb and gutter. Callahan asked whether tho cost of any f the road upgrade will be assessed to the persons living on the east side of Old Beach Road. Mabusth stated that the property owners on the east side cf Old Beach Road would not be included. Nettles asked whether curb and gutter is a requirement. Mabusth stated that curb and gutter is reqi'.ired in an urban area. She said. "Only Council can change that requirement. Staff had to include that requirement. Nettles stated that the people want t. leave the ro . as is and that the present road is in keeping with the character of the area. He stated that he preferred to have lesser density. Mabusth noted that if curb and gutter is not included in the subdivision, the resolution would need to be amended accordingly. Bernhardson suggested giving conceptual app^i jval so that the cost of the overlay could be provided. Motion, Mayor Grabek-Aye, Nays-4. Motion failed. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson. to conceptually approve the preliminary subdivision with a I*?" overlay. Staff is directed to include in the resclution language pertaining to curb and gutter being excluded from the requirements of this subdivision. Goetten asked whether Nettles' motion included a requirement to be provided with cost figures. Nettles r'^plied, "The motion is to conceptual approval of this subdivision and direct Staff to provide the Variance - 30 -