Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 22,1997 <br />( #5 - #2279! #2280 Marc and Tracy Whitehead - Continued) • <br />Gaffron indicated that with part of Lyman Avenue being public, it sets the tone for the <br />entire road to become public. <br />Barrett also noted that the reference to assessing the cost of the improvement requires a <br />demonstration that it would increase property values. Flint noted the benefit would be to <br />only a few homes. <br />Mrs. Stankovsky reported that one home on the east side is going to be taken for the <br />Highway 12 reconstruction. <br />Brian Palmer, who lives east of the Whitehead property, concurred with Mrs. <br />Stankovsky. He also said he believed the property owners would not be interested in <br />paying for a road improvement. He feels the entire road is substandard, and it would not <br />be economical or beneficial to improve it. <br />Jabbour was informed that there would be only one additional home in that area. <br />Howard McMillan asked what homes would benefit. Jabbour said he understood that the <br />homes ahead of any improvement would not benefit. Jabbour said any improvement <br />would then have to be paid for by the City. <br />Mrs. Stankovsky voiced concern for safety where the new driveway comes out from the is <br />subdivision. Gaffron said it would only be dangerous if a car was speeding past the curve <br />and the person coming out of the driveway is not looking. Mrs. Stankovsky said there <br />were trees on both sides of the road. She asked if Staff felt the line of site is appropriate <br />for the driveway at that location. Gaffron said while caution needs to be taken, it was not <br />unreasonable for the driveway to be located there. Cook noted that grading will also be <br />required along the northerly shoulder. <br />Jabbour asked about language for modification of the resolution. Winston said the <br />engineering issues of driveway, screening, and drainage could state the applicant could <br />work with Staff. Jabbour asked Barrett's opinion. Barrett said the guidelines should be <br />fairly clear for the preliminary plat. While the drainage, curve, and setback issues were <br />satisfactory, Barrett said the issue of screening should be clarified further. <br />Winston said the Planning Commission suggested the applicant work with Staff. Barrett <br />said the Council would then cede the matter to Staff. <br />Gaflron referred to page 5 of resolution under item 96 regarding the goal of providing <br />sufficient screening at the southeast corner of Lot 1. He indicates it is left wide open as <br />to what is done and requires follow -up, as it is unknown when the home will be built. <br />These requirements would also have to be included as a covenant to be enforceable. <br />Gallon said he preferred a conclusion be made as this is not a standard subdivision. • <br />10 <br />