Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,June 19,2006 <br /> � 6:00 dclock p.m. ` <br /> (#06-3204 CHAD LINDBLOOM,CONTINUED) <br /> Lindbloom stated the house is approximately 4200 square feet without the basement. <br /> Bremer commented the lot is heavily wooded, and if a variance were granted,it likely would not cause <br /> any impact to the neighbors. <br /> Lindbloom stated there is a 50 foot outlot between them and their neighbor and that the neighbors have <br /> indicated they do not have a problem with the improvements. <br /> Warren stated the property to the north also has a garage that is located 22 feet from the property line. <br /> Kempf inquired whether it is Staff's position that some day this outlot may turn into a road and <br /> therefore the City is requiring the setbacks from the road. Kempf inquired what the likelihood of <br /> turning that outlot into a road would be. <br /> Gaffron stated,as noted in the Staff report, since the 1970's the City has been requiring opposing <br /> cul-de-sacs to create corridors to the next property. In a few cases those have been developed to provide <br /> access to the next property up. Gaffron indicated he is not aware of any cases where the corridors <br /> between dueling cul-de-sacs actually have been connected. Gaffron stated in his opinion there is a very <br /> low likelihood that this outlot would be converted into a road but that the City would continue to <br /> maintain its setback requirements. <br /> Gaffron stated there probably is not any overwhelming emergency services benefit that would be gained <br /> by connecting certain of the private roads that have these corridors. Gaffron indicated Staff would not <br /> recommend that the variances be granted just on a public policy basis. <br /> Kempf stated as far as maintenance,he understands it is difficult to maintain two cul-de-sacs as <br /> compared to having a through street. Kempf noted a number of trees would need to be removed in order <br /> to construct the road and that he does not envision that ever happening. Kempf stated the City would - <br /> lose no rights to using that street as a street or an access in the future simply because there was a <br /> variance granted. <br /> Gaffron stated that is correct. <br /> Kroeger stated one of the drawings depicts a new driveway to the west of the existing driveway, and <br /> inquired replacement of the driveway is part of the plan. <br /> Lindbloom stated the whole driveway would be replaced but only one entrance would remain. <br /> Kempf stated it is unfortunate given the way circumstances have unfolded. <br /> Warren stated the reason it may have been missed is because this easement in all likelihood will never <br /> be used and,two,the fact that the easement is not recorded against the property. Warren stated the road <br /> easement is filed on the homeowners association and not the individual properties. <br /> PAGE 3 <br />