Laserfiche WebLink
Date Application Received: 8112116 <br />Date Application Considered as Complete: 8112116 <br />60 -Day Review Period Expires: 10/11/16 <br />Department Approval: <br />Name: Michael P. Gaf&on <br />Title: Senior Planner <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Administrator Approval: <br />Council <br />Exhibit I <br />Date: September 12, 2016 <br />Item No.: 16 <br />Agenda Section: <br />Planning Dept. <br />Item Description: #15-3763116-3860, Christopher & Gail Bollis / Christopher & Rachel Bollis <br />200-350 Stubbs Bay Road North <br />- Final Plat Review <br />List of Exhibits <br />A — Final Plat Application & Submittal Narrative 815116 <br />B — Draft Final Plat Drawing <br />C — Final Development Plans <br />D — City Engineer Continent Letter 912116 <br />E — Plan Excerpts re Horizontal Curve Radius Variance <br />F -- Draft Covenants <br />G -- Proposed Septic System Agreement <br />H — Preliminary Plat Approval Resolution No. 6536 (9114115) <br />On September 14, 2015 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6536 granting preliminary <br />approval for a 7 -lot residential plat of the properties at 200-350 Stubbs Bay Road North. The <br />applicants have applied for final plat approval in order to finalize the project and proceed (the 5 - <br />lot proposal reviewed by the Planning Commission this summer has been dropped). A small <br />number of questions have been brought forth by staff and consultants that require Council review <br />and direction prior to final plat approval, which is anticipated for the Council's September 26 <br />meeting. <br />Issues for Council Consideration <br />Road Design. Consulting Engineer Bob Bean has noted that certain horizontal curves <br />in the road design do not meet the City's 275' minimum radius requirement for a 30 <br />mph road (Exhibit D, Item 3.1 and Exhibit E). The long curve leading to the new cul- <br />de-sac has a 250' radius and is not an issue in staff s opinion. However, the snakelike <br />configuration just north of the existing cul-de-sac has a series of nonconforming curves <br />in an attempt to save trees in this area, maintaining a screening buffer to the neighbors <br />to the south. While this was discussed during the preliminary plat review, it was not <br />apparent at that time that the curves would not be in compliance with code. Issue: <br />What are the justifications for the variance to the road design standards to allow <br />this? Staff would argue that the attempt to save trees is a weak justification, as Orono <br />has generally declined to grant variances based on saving a tree, having experienced <br />