My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-19-2000 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2000
>
06-19-2000 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2012 2:11:16 PM
Creation date
2/27/2012 2:11:16 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> JUNE 19,2000 <br /> • <br /> (#2596 BRENSHELL HOMES,CONTINUED) <br /> City Staff is recommending this application be tabled until the next Planning Commission meeting <br /> in order to give the Applicant time to resolve some of these issues. <br /> Steve Behnke stated he has a number of questions relating to the issues raised in the Planner's <br /> report. Behnke stated currently in his view Garden Lane as being required because of Lot 64, <br /> which is the lot to the north being a potential public access to a private lot. Behnke stated in <br /> his opinion Lot 1 does show over one-half acre dry buildable outside of the NURP pond,with the <br /> engineer for this development calculating two-thirds dry buildable on this lot. Lots 2 and 3, <br /> lot width variances would not be necessary since at Wildhurst Trail the lots are 224' and 153', and <br /> if measured along the setback,there is the potential that they are less than 140',but are obviously <br /> greater in width across the northern section. Behnke pointed out both lots will be located on a <br /> cul-de-sac. Behnke stated it was on the recommendation of City Staff that this plan took the approach <br /> from Garden Lane. Lot 4 also contains enough frontage along Garden Lane and would not need a <br /> variance. <br /> Behnke acknowledged that there are issues relating to grading and drainage concerning this <br /> property,which will need to be addressed further. Behnke stated it is his opinion that Lot 6 and <br /> the ravine have been addressed. Behnke noted they have adopted the DNR's definition of a bluff <br /> as the method of determining the top of the ravine. The top of the ravine does not extend to <br /> Garden Lane and ends prior to it, and because of that,the acreage on both sides is being incorporated <br /> into the dry buildable acres. Behnke stated the driveway does not impact the ravine proper as <br /> • defined by the bluff definition. Behnke stated Lot 6 consists of approximately 1.25 acres in size, <br /> and they would be able to manipulate the lot line if necessary. <br /> Behnke commented the current division of water between the north and south is essentially <br /> equivalent to what it was prior to this plan being created, with this development not increasing <br /> the water runoff. Behnke stated the intention of the NURP pond is to hold the water to allow it <br /> to drain to the ravine at the same rate that it is currently. Behnke stated the water that drains to <br /> this property offsite is also included in the NURP pond proposed for Lot 1. <br /> Behnke stated the comment by the City Engineer that all drainage be directed to the north is <br /> opposite the natural direction of the water. Behnke stated in his view there are some inaccuracies <br /> in the statements by the City Engineer. <br /> Behnke stated in his opinion he should not be responsible to extend Garden Lane to the north as <br /> part of this project since they are offsite. Behnke indicated they are in agreement with the standard <br /> easements and that Outlot A should be a public right-of-way, with the road being a public road due <br /> to the number of houses that will be serviced by it. <br /> Behnke stated they will continue to work with City Staff on these issues. Behnke noted the proposed <br /> drainage for this development is designed to keep the water runoff at the same rate as what <br /> currently exists in the ravine. <br /> Weinberger stated regardless of the one-half acre dry contiguous,these lots are located within the <br /> one acre zoning district and still require the one acre dry buildable regardless of being separated by <br /> • a drainage area. Weinberger stated Lot 6 does meet this requirement, with Lot 1 being less than one <br /> PAGE 21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.