My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-19-2010 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2010
>
04-19-2010 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/14/2012 3:40:58 PM
Creation date
8/14/2012 3:40:51 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
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
� MIlWTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSTON MEETING <br /> _ Monday,March 19,2007 <br /> ' 6:04 o'clock p.m. <br /> {#07-3271 Jndson Dayton,Continued) <br /> Gaffron stated one of the issues is the level of usage af the road and that the Council has generally not <br /> required upgrades to the roads on other projects similar to this. Gaffron statec3 rerouting of the road <br /> should be considered, � <br /> Dayton stated it is unlikely the road would be rerouted given the topography of the land, <br /> Gronberg stated with the plat across from Little Orchard a portion of the site had a dedicated easement, <br /> Gaffron stated the City reviewed the traiI in#his area fve or six years ago and were unable to determine <br /> which side of the road the irail should be located on. <br /> Acting ChairKempf apened the public hearing at 11;08 pm. � . <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application, <br /> Acting Chair Kempf closed the public hearing at 11:08 p.m. <br /> Kempf inquired what width of roadway the code requires for two lots. <br /> Craffron stated a road that serves three or more homes has to meet a 24-foot width. One or fwo back lots <br /> can be served with a 30-foot corridor but there would be a three acre standard for the lo#s. <br /> . Gronberg stated Lots 3 and 4 were included because they do not have 200 feet at the lake and 200 feet at <br /> � the 75-foot setback,which requires a minor change to bring those up to code. � <br /> Zullo inquired whether those two lots can be served without having some type of cul-de-sac or turn- <br /> around. <br /> Gaffron stated as the lots become developed,it is likely the fire niarshal is gaing to require some sort of <br /> � Iooped driveway. � <br /> . Zullo asked whether the gra�el road an Outlot B would be upgraded to serve the other lot. <br /> Winston stated they would like to keep it as natural as possible and�reserve the trees in that area, <br /> Zullo comrnented it is a fairly narrow standard gravel road. <br /> Gaffron stated the City does not have a specific standard for driveways serving two lots and that it could <br /> remain gravel or be paved. Gaffron stated it is likely the,fire marshal is going to recommend the width <br /> be 20 feet. <br /> Kempf inquired how the average lakeshore setback would be determined. <br /> � PAGE 35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.