My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-25-2015 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
10-25-2015 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2015 2:29:01 PM
Creation date
12/1/2015 2:23:50 PM
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.
/
266
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
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 12, 2015 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 9 of 37 <br /> <br />8. #15-3770 JON NORRIS AND CATHERINE MORRISON AND PATRICK AND <br />MELISSA MULHERN, 460 ORCHARD PARK ROAD, PRELIMINARY PLAT (continued) <br /> <br />Lot 1 consists of 10.68 acres but includes 5.42 acres of wetland. Lot 2 consists is 10.94 acres and consists <br />of 1.58 acres of wetland. The applicants have provided a Conservation Design Report, which has been <br />included in Council’s packet. The site is fairly open, with the only place with trees is essentially the area <br />around the house, around the fence lines, and the wetlands. None of those areas are expected to be <br />impacted. <br /> <br />The City Engineer has provided some general and detailed comments and the applicant has submitted <br />revised plans that appear to address many of those comments. Gaffron noted the revised plans have not <br />been reviewed by the City Engineer at this point. <br /> <br />The driveway length for Lot 1 extending from the point at which the shared driveways converge is <br />approximately 900 feet. Fire Chief Van Eyll has indicated that if the house is sprinkled, that driveway <br />can be as narrow as 12 feet. It is currently proposed at 10 feet, which will have to be expanded to 12 feet. <br />If the house is not sprinkled, the driveway should be 20 feet in drivable width wherever possible. In <br />either case, a loop should be incorporated into the driveway near the house for emergency and service <br />vehicle maneuverability. <br /> <br />The Council should consider whether there is a need to provide for any additional plantings or a <br />landscape plan. If this was a formal private road rather than a driveway, the code would require one tree <br />per 40 feet of frontage. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their August meeting and found that it appeared to <br />be compliant with code requirements, with the exception that the defined width of proposed Lot 1 as <br />measured at the 10-foot front setback line is approximately 110 feet where 300 feet is normally required. <br />The practical difficulty for this variance is the shape of the underlying property, with its relatively <br />minimal frontage on Orchard Park Road. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the preliminary plat subject to a <br />Conservation Design Report being submitted prior to Council review of the application. In addition, the <br />applicant shall agree to construct the shared driveway as a development improvement rather than waiting <br />for home construction to begin, adhere to the recommendations of the fire marshal as to individual <br />driveway width and configuration, and addressing the City Engineer’s comments and recommendations <br />prior to Council review. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the Council should review the conservation design materials and determine whether there <br />are any potential concerns. The Council should also review whether a formal landscaping plan is required <br />and confirm whether the necessary lot width variance for Lot 1 is acceptable. The final issue the Council <br />should discuss is whether the location variances for the proposed pole barns located closer to the street <br />than the principal residences might be supported. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated if the Council feels that all issues of concern have been addressed, they should provide <br />Staff with direction for moving forward. <br /> <br />McMillan asked if access through the Jacobs Mills property would be on the east side of this <br />development.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.