Laserfiche WebLink
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 22, 1997 <br />• (#4 - #2204 James Fullerton III - Continued) <br />Goetten said she supported the subdivision but not the fee paid for park dedication. She <br />said she was in favor of moving forward with the subdivision. <br />Kelley moved, Flint seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3964, a conditional use permit, <br />and Resolution No. 3965, approving the plat of Fullerton Estates. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1, <br />Goetten, due to her objection to the park dedication fee paid. <br />(#5) # 2279! #2280 MARC AND TRACY WHITEHEAD, 1220 LYMAN AVENUE - <br />PRELIMINARY SUBDIVLSION APPROVAL - RESOLUTIONS NO. 3966 AND <br />3967 <br />The applicant was present along with Attorney, John Winston, and Surveyor, Walter <br />Gregory. <br />Gaffron reported that the proposed subdivision is before Council for preliminary plat <br />approval. The property is located on Lyman Avenue and includes an existing residence. <br />The road is partially public and partially private. The private portion is gravel and about <br />12' wide serving 5 residences with potential for one more. Two - thirds of a cul- de-sac at <br />the end of Lyman, east side of the property, was previously granted to the City by other <br />property owners, but has never been constructed. <br />• Gaffron indicated that this application was first submitted in 1990. The current proposal <br />is for a 4 -lot subdivision but revised per Planning Commission's recommendation to a 3- <br />lot plat. The existing house is served by a platted driveway located outside the property <br />on an easement. There were not a sufficient number of septic site locations for the three <br />additional lots. One site was unusuable because it is needed for access to Lot 1. <br />• <br />Gaffron reviewed the access options. The initially proposed option was for a driveway <br />that would traverse steep slopes and, therefore, was not recommended by staff. A cul- <br />de -sac was then considered but found by the Planning Commission to negatively impact <br />the Stankovsky property. It would result in the Stankovsky property becoming non- <br />conforming to the side setback requirements. <br />The Planning Commission had recommended approval of a 3 -lot plat. Lot 1 would be <br />served by a private outlot driveway on Outlot B. Lot 1 is a back lot. Outlot A would be <br />required to remain a 20' buffer to maintain a separation to the adjacent property and <br />possibly may be sold to the Stankovsky's. Since the driveway is an outlot, Lot 1 is <br />required to meet the 150% back lot area and setback standards. Staff recommended the <br />east setback for Lot 1 of 50' as opposed to the required 75' for flexibility in location of <br />the house. The reasoning behind the 1500/6 requirement is regarding impacts on <br />neighbors, which is not an issue at this location. <br />- -3 - <br />