My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-14-2002 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2002
>
10-14-2002 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/30/2012 3:37:19 PM
Creation date
3/30/2012 3:37:19 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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 />MONDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2002 <br />6. #02 -2822 Danielle Henely, 3422 Livingston Avenue—Variances—Resolution No. <br />4872 — Continued <br />conditional use permit per Section 10.03 Subdivision 10 to allow an accessory <br />building to be constructed on the subject property closer to the street than the <br />principal structure and on a through lot; with the new language in Item 4I included <br />in the resolution. <br />Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />10. Appeal of Administrative Decision —Fox Street Driveway <br />Weinberger stated that the applicant was appealing the denial of a request for driveway <br />access permit for property located at 2530 Fox Street. At the time the lot was created, in <br />1996, it was planned to use a shared driveway that also serves two lots to the north. The <br />2530 lot was required to enter into a driveway maintenance agreement with the lots to the <br />north. <br />The applicant was requesting direct access to Fox Street. The staff recommended denial <br />in order to limit the number of direct driveway access points to Fox Street, according to <br />the Comprehensive Plan stating that the number of curb cuts and access points be limited. <br />While Fox Street is not termed arterial, it is one of only a few through streets that do <br />0 <br />receive additional east -west traffic. • <br />The letter requesting appeal stated that the driveway would have a steep incline for access. <br />Staff found that the direct access from Fox Street would have an average elevation change <br />of 10% to the turnaround site, where the access from the shared driveway would have an <br />average elevation change of 5% to the turnaround, therefore the driveway from the shared <br />access would have less elevation change than the direct street access. <br />Staff concluded that the shared driveway would be the appropriate access to the property. <br />Troy Prosa of Formation Architects stated that the percent grade from Fox to the <br />turnaround is greater than the grade from the shared drive, but they were measuring from <br />the street to the garage, where the residents will be parking. He stated that the grade from <br />street to garage is less than the grade from the shared access to the garage. He stated that <br />the driveway approach approved by the City would result in the loss of 7 -10 mature trees, <br />including the oldest tree on the lot. With the approach from Fox, they would minimize <br />tree removal. <br />Murphy asked what their major concern was. Prosa stated that their two major concerns <br />were preserving the trees and the grade of approach. <br />Sansevere asked if maintenance of the shared drive was a concern. Julie Johnson stated it <br />was not. If they were grandfathered in to the maintenance agreement it would be fine with • <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.