Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,October 16,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Curtis stated the back lot rule was created for properties that have the acreage to subdivide but not the <br /> frontage. In the situation of a back lot,the City would require a 30-foot wide access lot be platted that <br /> provides access through the front lot to the back lot. Under City Code,the back lot area should be 150 <br /> percent of the zoning district requirement and the depth of the required street yard setback shall be 150 <br /> percent of the zoning district requirements. <br /> Thiesse asked if the second back lot would be alleviated if the existing home keeps their driveway on <br /> Walters Port. <br /> Curtis indicated it would because then the Hueler's lot would be the only back lot. <br /> Schoenzeit stated in his view the applicants need to bring back a revised plan. <br /> Curtis stated from Staff's standpoint,the issue with the application is the disregard for the access outlot <br /> creation and that a dedicated outlot is key in this scenario for the future. Curtis noted the Walters Port <br /> corridor is 20 feet wide and is smaller than some driveways in the City. If there is a way to plat a corridor <br /> that meets the guideline of the Council and the Planning Commission that will satisfy the access and the <br /> frontage requirements,that would go a long way to alleviating Staffs concerns. Curtis stated City Code <br /> requires a cul-de-sac if a private road is being created,but a variance can be granted to allow for alternate <br /> accommodations,and the applicant and the fire department have been working on that. <br /> Schoenzeit stated he is in favor of tabling the application and having the applicant bring back something <br /> clean because it is not the work of the Planning Commission to straighten out the application. <br /> Vogstrom noted there was a sketch plan review and everyone seemed to be on the same page at that time. <br /> Curtis noted there was a platted outlot on the sketch plan which has gone away. <br /> Vogstrom stated that can be put back on. Vogstrom stated he would prefer to discuss the variances rather <br /> than tabling it at this point. <br /> Schoenzeit noted Staff recommended denials on each application and that in his view it is kind of selfish <br /> on their part to be trying to get the Planning Commission to fix their incomplete application. <br /> Vogstrom stated there are a number of issues that have not been discussed at all. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the plan has gone backwards from the sketch plan. <br /> Vogstrom stated the reason for creating the outlot was that they were attempting to sell a piece to the <br /> Huelers and he did not know about the back lot variance until last week Friday. Vogstrom indicated he <br /> went over their applications a number of times with Staff and that he is very frustrated that they are not <br /> being able to be heard on the variances in front of the Planning Commission. <br /> Thiesse commented he has not seen an application with this many variances before. <br /> Schoenzeit suggested the applicant reduce the number of variances being requested. <br /> Vogstrom stated the Planning Commission needs to understand the project and why they are requesting <br /> the variances. <br /> Page 11 of 32 <br />