My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-14-2000 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2000
>
02-14-2000 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/1/2012 3:23:11 PM
Creation date
3/1/2012 3:23:11 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 149 2000 <br />�J <br />( #2540 Bradley Hoyt, continued) <br />Barrett stated a public hearing had been scheduled with the Planning Commission on January <br />19, 2000. Neither Mr. Hoyt nor representatives on his behalf appeared at the January 191 public <br />hearing. <br />Mr. Sheridan stated Mr. Hoyt is prepared to submit a complete application to present at the <br />February 28, 2000 meeting of the Council. <br />Mayor Jabbour stated a new public hearing with the Planning Commission may be required. <br />Barrett stated a public hearing would be required to review the variance request. <br />Kelley stated the earliest this item could potentially return to the City Council would be the last <br />meeting in March. <br />Mr. Sheridan stated he would be willing to draft a letter to extend the deadline to permit time to <br />proceed with the variance request. <br />Kelley moved, and Peterson seconded, to continue this item to 5A. • <br />Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />5. 42550 Charles Van Eeckhout, 120 Brown Road South - Subdivision for Planned <br />Residential Development <br />Mr. Van Eeckhout was present with representative John Bergh of Loucks and Associates. <br />Weinberger explained the issue facing this application was that the dry buildable acreage <br />available totaled 13.7 acres where 14 acres are required for 7 lots. As planned, the subdivision <br />did not meet city requirements of 2 acres per lot. The Planning Commission recommended <br />denying the application based on the total dry buildable not meeting the minimum requirement <br />of 2 acres dry buildable per lot in the RR1B zoning district. <br />Kellogg stated that no trail or sidewalk was planned with the recommended 50 foot road width. <br />Sansevere asked if the applicant had considered a reduction to 6 lots. Van Eeckhout responded <br />that he would prefer 7 lots and felt that would be attainable once soil borings were done in the <br />spring. <br />40 <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.