04-17-2000 Planning Commission Minutes

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR APRIL 17, 2000 • (#2549 David Lovelace, Continued) is located primarily on the Uran property. Gaffron indicated he has not viewed the site since the survey stakes were placed. Gaffron stated Access Point D is 50 feet wide, with a portion being vacated in approximately the 1950s. This access point is not suitable for vehicle access and has merging lot lines. LMCD code requires a ten foot setback, with this area potentially only being able to have a five foot setback due to the merging lot lines. Gaffron stated there is a potential for two lots to be located in this area, with no defined pathway. Gaffron stated Access Point E is not suitable for vehicular access and would require a substantial stairway system due to the steep bank in the area. Access Points F and F-2 require additional survey work to determine whether the right-of-way currently extends to the shoreline. Access G is steep but would provide a relatively pedestrian friendly access point. Access Point H has a very narrow right-of-way capable of vehicle access but has suffered severe erosion over the years from over-use and abuse. Due to its narrow width, this access point is too narrow to have a dock that would meet LMCD's minimum setback requirements while still maintaining usability for vehicles. Gaffron stated in conclusion it his opinion that the two most viable access points would be Access Point C or Access Point D, which are both wide enough to permit more than one dock. Gaffron stated he would not recommend docks at any of the other possible access points. Gaffron stated due to the erosion being experienced at Access H, he would recommend the Public Works Department look at the situation to see what restoration would be appropriate and to limit its access by erecting a chain or gate. Gaffron noted there currently are vehicles on Big Island, which will need to be looked into further. • Gaffron stated it is City Staff's recommendations, one, that inland parcels 1 and 2 be allowed dock access at Access C; two, inland parcel 3 continue to be allowed a dock access at Access D; three, inland parcels 4 through 8 should be assigned future access at Access D if they request it, subject to LMCD regulations; four, inland parcel 9 could be served by a dock at either Access D or Access E; five, accesses A, B, F, G, and H do not readily lend themselves to providing dock access to inland lots and should therefore remain dock-free; and six, access H has a recent severe erosion problem which needs to be addressed, and may result in gating or closure of that access by the City for all but emergency and incidental service vehicle uses. Lovelace indicated his view of the situation is basically the same as what he stated in November Lovelace stated one of the original proposals was to allow him access through Access Point C. Lovelace indicated the neighbors have attempted to resolve this issue but were unable to reach a firm consensus on where access should be. Hawn indicated that some members of the Planning Commission have had an opportunity to tour Big Island. Hawn commented in her view Access Point C seems to make the most sense. Lovelace inquired whether it was City Staff's proposal to have two docks located at Access C. Gaffron indicated separate docks could be provided for Lovelace and Scheftel at Access C. Scheftel indicated she would prefer to have only one dock at that location and would not object to sharing a dock with Lovelace. Mrs. Uran stated she would not be in favor of improving the road since the majority of the roadway lies within their property and they would prefer to limit the amount of traffic on the road. • Lindquist inquired whether the Urans are in agreement with Staff's recommendations. Page 6