Laserfiche WebLink
REGTJLAR 'MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JUNE 13, 1977 Page 26 <br /> � Mr. Johnson has subMitted a copy of the 1968 State SUBDIVISION <br /> permit for dredging. Is this channel legal? The 360 North Arm Lane <br /> �rmit indicates the dredging permit was conditioned (Continued) <br /> approval of all other riparian owners. Up until <br /> � now, everyone has indicated to me that Mr. Boeye <br /> (previous owner of Victoria Grain Property) never <br /> agreed to this dredging, The cover letter of the <br /> • permit application also indicates a requirement of <br /> notification before commencing with dredging. I <br /> � have no document confirming this inspection or <br /> investigation. <br /> � <br /> No park dedication fee was ever collected on the <br /> � previous subdivision of the property back in <br /> November of 1975. Records indicate the park <br /> � dedication fee was waived until we amended this <br /> • ordinance. The previous subdivision was up for <br /> action the same time the A1 «hitman subdivision <br /> � proposal was up for approval. We waived the fee <br /> until we would be able to determine a satisfactory <br /> � formula. This proposal should, therefore, be <br /> assessed a park dedication fee for all th��� lots <br /> that have resulted from the two subdivisions. <br /> The raw land value of the total 10 acres is $16 , 700 � <br /> � (this is less than twice the value of my 1/2 acre <br /> non-riparian lot on Forest Lake Drive although it <br /> is 27 times larger) . The park dedication fee for <br /> �ubdivision will be $750 ($250 per lot for 3 lots) . <br /> Public Hearing scheduled for June 6 , 1977 <br /> Public Hearing - June 6, 1977 <br /> � Heard from the applicant and the attorney of Mr. White <br /> � who has property on the same channel running through <br /> this lot. Mr. White was very concerned about allowing <br /> � any additional dock rights or dredging on the channel. <br /> � Mr. Johnson said that he has a dock off the channel <br /> now and would like to use it for a new house on <br /> � the eastern parcel. He was concerned with the <br /> � required access width to the eastern lot and was <br /> told that this should be at least 30 ' wide. <br /> � Commission addressed the need to have North Arm <br /> Lane conform to miminum public street right of <br /> r way width of 50 ` through acquisition of 17' additional. <br /> Planning Commission noted that no park dedication fee <br /> � had been paid on this subdivision from last year. <br /> � Recommended approval subject to: <br /> � <br /> l. Each parcel at least 200 ' wide and 2 acres in size. <br /> �. Access to east parcel at least 30 ' in width. <br /> Dedication of 17 ' additional right of way along <br /> North Arm Lane (or applicant' s ability to negotiate <br /> • with the neighbor across the street so that the <br /> additional right of way would be requirements <br /> w�ich can be shared by all affected properties) o (Continued) <br /> � <br />