My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-10-1986 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1986
>
03-10-1986 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/22/2025 10:10:52 AM
Creation date
12/22/2025 9:56:18 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.
/
435
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
building sites. <br />Planning Commission discussed the proposed driveway <br />which will cross the designated wetland in order to <br />access the rear building site. It was noted that the <br />Watershed District has approved this; crossing. <br />There were no comments from the public and the public <br />hearing was closed. <br />It was moved by Rovegno, seconded by " ,y lor, to <br />recommend approval of the preliminary subd.Lvision and <br />conditional use permit subject to staff s <br />recommendations. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />#990 WARD FERRELL <br />3405, 3411 &3415 WATERTOWN ROAD <br />VARIANCE - SECOND REVIEW <br />Ward Ferrell was present for this matter. <br />Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron eAplained that <br />this application was reviewed approximately 6 months ago <br />on an appeal basis givi; .1 the applicant a general idea <br />regarding the City's p licy regarding situations of <br />three contiguous suhstandar(a lots in common ownership. <br />All the Planning Commission members basircily concurred <br />"lith their opinions -tated at the November 18, 1985 <br />anning Commission mc-_sting, that this property should <br />divided into two lots only. <br />Mr. Ferrell stated that the City of Orono requested him <br />to divide the property back in 1958 so there would not <br />be future problems with building another home, and that <br />this fact should be honored. fie also noted that when the <br />zoning changed from a I acr^ to a 2 acre zoning <br />district, he was t.ol0 t;,is would not affect <br />existing lots. <br />Assistant Zoning Ac.,ninistor reviewed the history <br />of zoning changes in that a. -om ? 950 to 1984. He <br />noted that the proposed le.; the criteria required <br />but a density issue and setting precedent are open. <br />It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to <br />recottanend denial of the 3 lots b •ause it does not meet <br />applicable building code criteria. Motion, Ayes 2, Nays <br />3. Motion dies. Rovegno, McDonald, and Goetten voted <br />nay. Rovegno stated that he felt this is a difficult <br />cision because it seems that 3 lots would have met <br />de requirements up until a few years ago. McDonald <br />skated that because of the many .:ars -f ownership by <br />applicant, it would be inappropriate Jeny. Goetten <br />concurred with McDonald in this matter r—d stated that <br />lots would be acceptable. <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.