Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-20-1995 Planning Commission Minutes0 - "PLANNING COMMISSION COUNCIL PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE % /iI�6ZL� �, I ( PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 0. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15 16 17 8 20 PRESENT FOR (from agenda) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING is MINUTES FOR MARCH 20, 1995 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Charles Schroeder, Stephen Peterson, Sandra Smith, Date Lindquist, Candace Rowlette, Charles Nolan, Jr., and Janice Berg. Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth and Recorder Sherry Frost represented Staff. Councilmembers Jabbour and Goetten were present. Chair Schroeder called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING ( #1) 7 :00 P.M. #2000 CORTLEN G. CLOUTIER, 2480 CASCO POINT ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION, CLASS I - PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 -7:53 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant, Mr. Cloutier, was present. Mabusth reported that the application is for a division of legally combined lots 1, 3, 4, and outlot 1, which is a type 1 classification of subdivision. These lots were originally • combined for tax purposes. The applicant is asking for a division of Lot 1, which meets all requirements. The issue is access. The existing access will serve lot 1. The access currently serves the homestead parcel. The drive would be altered to only serve lot 1, and the homestead parcel (combined lots 3 and 4) will be served by existing drive at Frederick Street. When the land was subdivided, an outlot (20' wide) was created within the Tillson. Villa Carman subdivision. Lots 1-4 could gain access from the road outlot and lot 5 from Frederick Street. Today, lot 2 achieves access from outlot and combined lots 1, 3, and 4 from direct accesses at Casco Point Road and Frederick Street. At this time, Mabusth commented that it was important to determine what are the future plans for the lots; mainly, if there would be a future division of lots 3 and 4. The new lots must meet requirements of current code and provide approved legal access. There is adequate area to subdivide lots 1, 3, and 4. The required area for each lot will depend on whether the lot will achieve access via a private road or driveway outlot. Lot 1 has access from Casco Point Road from an existing approved curb cut. Lot 4 has an existing access from Frederick Street. The code states that only two lots can be served from a driveway outlot and that the back lot meet 150% of required area. The lines of existing sewer and water service to residence would need to be located and shown on survey. The location for the water connection for the original house is unknown. The sewer may come from Casco Point Road. There may be a need for an 40 easement depending on their locations. A municipal sewer line intersects lot 4 at the northwest corner. The City would ask for an easement over the sewer line. • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 ( #1 - #2000 Cortlen Cloutier -Continued) Mr. Cloutier said he had nothing to add to the report and had no plans at this time for lots 3 and 4. He reported that he purchased 4 lots in 1965. The property was platted with a roadway on outlot 1 providing egress and ingress. Cloutier said he used outlot I for access at one time, and then he put in a guest driveway and now uses access off of Frederick Street. The applicant said that the outlot 1 roadway has existed for over 30 years. The driveway he created has been used for less than 30 years along with the access on Frederick Street. The applicant reported he created the access so as not to inconvenience the residents of lot 2, the Paurus family. Mr. Cloutier said he called the County tax division in 1967 and asked for one tax statement. He reported that he was not aware that he had legally combined the lots, which was done. Cloutier would like to divide lot 1 to build a house for his son. The lot division can be done through metes and bounds division through the City. The lot meet the area and width requirements. With the lot division, the driveway through lot 1 would be removed, as it was never legally installed. The Commission members discussed what would happen with lots 3 and 4 if lot I were to be divided now. Rowlette said that lot 3 would become a back tot. Rowlette questioned whether access would be through a new road or an outlot for the back lots. Lindquist thought that since it had been subdivided in the past that it would have to be allowed to be so again. Rowlette suggested having the city attorney peruse the situation to eliminate a problem with subdivision in the future. Wilbur Anderson of 3555 Frederick Street asked how the lots were declared for sewer and water hook -up. Mabusth responded that the property has been assessed for 2 water units but with this sewer project, by lineal footage along the roads were assessed. John Erickson, 1620 Shadywood Road, who owned two lots on Shadywood, which his parents had since 1941, said that people were asked at that time if they wanted one or two tax statements if they had two lots. He reported that he has one statement but owns two lots with two sewer stubs. Mabusth agreed that their land use planning was not consistent when sewer and water stubs were given out to properties. Schroeder noted that 3 sewer hookups would be needed if the lots were subdivided. Mr. Cloutier said that the house located on lot 4 is not hooked up on Casco Pt but hooked up through Frederick Street. When Casco sewer was installed, he had been asked where he would like the sewer stubbed in. There is a sewer stub to serve lot 1 at Casco Point Road. An easement runs through lot I for lot 3 for both ingress /egress and utilities. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 • ( #1 - #2000 - Cortlen Cloutier - Continued) If the lots have been combined, which Mabusth verifies that they have indeed been combined, then the Planning Commission would have to determine the size of the lots for subdivision and how access would be provided. Rowlette questioned whether lot 3 should be treated as an already designated lot or not. Mr. Paurus asked about the boathouse located on the property. He reported that it was old and unsafe and needs to either be repaired or removed. Schroeder responded that this application does not apply to the boathouse but did ask the applicant what his plans were for the future of the boathouse. Mr. Cloutier reported that he wished to rehabilitate the boathouse. He had installed a 3- season porch on top of the boathouse and said he had thought he had been given verbal approval to do so by the building inspector at that time. Mabusth said that the permit on file was given for a s }ngle story boathouse only. Rowlette informed the applicant of the City's desire to have no structures in t�e 0 -75' zone. If the boathouse is to be repaired, and the cost would be more than 50% of the value of the boathouse at the time of the 1975 code, the boathouse must be removed. No repairs can be done without a pem*. Rowlette said she would like to have the city attorney's opinion on whether there would be r any rights grandfathered to the property if it had been legally combined. Mabusth responded to the negative saying that the current code would apply to the property. Lindquist agreed that any further division of lots 3 and 4, once lot 1 was approved for subdivision, would have to follow the current codes. Nolan reiterated to the applicant that if he desires any future division of the lots, the commission needs to see the plan at this time. Cloutier responded that he did not wish to be concerned with future division at this time, only the one lot as presented. Schroeder emphasized that the present plan for lot 1 could mean that lot 3 would not be able to be subdivided in the future because of the issue of access and would be subject to current standards. The commission members suggested to the applicant that he come back before the commission with an amended application with plans for all the lots. Mabusth said, once again, that the subdivision could be done with a simple metes and bounds subdivision. Mabusth put the applicant on notice that any future subdivision would need a new plat due to the access issue. The current code may not allow the division of lots 3 and 4 at a later date. If the applicant's intentions are anything other than the two lot subdivision as stated in the applicant, the intentions of the applicant needed to be known at this time. The applicant said he had no plans at this time but that his children said they would like to see a future division of lots 3 and 4, therefore, requested tabling of the application. Mabusth said the property would have to be replatted. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 ( #1 - #2000 - Cortlen Cloutier - Continued) Schroder moved, Peterson seconded, to table application #2000. Ayes 7, Nays 0. ( #2) #1950 GLENN UPTON, 3685 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:53 -8:03 P.M. The Applicant, Mr. Upton, was present. The application originated in the summer of 1994 for an increase in hardcover in the 0 -75' setback requiring a variance for a deck. The Planning Commission denied the application. The applicant asked to go back to the Planning Commission with an amended plan. The amended plan is for 192 s.f of additional living space and 484 s.f for an attached garage. The amended proposal is for 52' Lakeshore setback, where 75' is required. It does meet the minimum DNR required setback of 50'. A hardship list is included as well as a petition from the neighbors which support the second proposal. John Erickson asked where the property was located from him. Erickson asked about the garage location, and how the proposal affects the deeded access and the public right-of- way. The original garage is being removed, and the new garage will be attached to the side of the house. The applicant said that the land crossing the public access had been deeded to him by the county. Schroeder said that this issue does not affect the application. Rowlette informed the applicant of the city ordinance disallowing any boats larger than 20' to be stored outside on a property. Schroeder noted the 68 s.f increase in hardcover in the 0 -75' zone with the remainder of the increase in the 75 -250' zone. He also noted the attempt by the applicant to meet as many requirements as he could and the large number of hardships pertaining to the application. Peterson asked about the status of the survey and side setback. It was determined that the survey had been updated last year with the filing of the current application. Mabusth and the applicant confirmed that the side setback requirement was met with 113. Nolan asked if the applicant was willing to remove the shed and other items located in that area, which the applicant said he would. Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve applicant #2950 as amended with the condition that all hardcover removal be completed prior to construction to include shed • and miscellaneous items. The access garage could be retained until the proposed attached garage is completed. Ayes 7, Nays 0. 4 • u • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 ( #3) #1979 RICHARD LITTLE, 1890 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - WRITTEN RENOTIFICATION 8:03- 8:09 P.M. The applicant, who was out of town, was represented by his son -in -law. Mabusth said that the application was before the Planning Commission in November and required an updated survey of the shoreline. The proposed reconstruction of the 14x26' deck would result in 40 s.f of additional hardcover located in the 0 -75' zone and the entire deck is located in front of the average Lakeshore setback line. The Planning Commission had approved the application in November awaiting updated survey showing that the deck was not in the 0 -75' zone. Mrs. Little had given her approval over the phone for the reshaping of the deck to eliminate the deck portion in the 0 -75' zone. Their representative at this meeting asked that the deck remain as proposed sitting on the original footprint. The trees in front of the deck would remain. Nolan said it would be out of character to approve any structure in the 0 -75' zone. He asked the representative if the applicant would consider removing brick hardcover that extended beyond the dimensions of the deck above the patio to reduce hardcover to offset the reconstruction of the deck. The representative said this would be acceptable. Nolan moved, Smith seconded, to approve application #1979 for replacement of the 14x26' deck as previously existed with the removal of hardcover extending beyond the deck dimensions in the patio area. Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#4) #1999 DAVID AND VICKI VICKERMAN, 2475 DUNWOODY AVENUE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:09 -8:22 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Vickerman, were present. Mabusth reported that the application would involve the removal of a 16x24' boathouse and replaced with a 12x15' deck and access stairs leading down steep bank to the lake. The problem with the structure is that it would be 10' above the lake and 9' from the shoreline. The code allows for a 8x4' landing with access stairs. The applicant reported that due to the steepness of the lot, there is no where to do anything to enjoy the lake without being able to walk out onto a deck. This would be the only access to the lake and use of the Lakeshore itself. Mrs. Vickerman asked if a wood deck could be installed where the boathouse is now located. • • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 (#4 - #1999 - David and Vicki Vickerman - Continued) Mabusth responded that the only allowed structure would be the 4x8' landing as part of the access stair structure. Rowlette informed the applicant that the area where the boathouse is would need to be stabilized but could provide an area to sit and enjoy the lake but no deck would be allowed. The need to eliminate hardcover in the 0 -75' zone was emphasized. The applicant was informed that open - timbered decking is considered hardcover because the timber does not absorb water. The deck as proposed would not allow any vegetation to grow underneath it and would result in runoff into the lake. Added vegetation on properties to improve water runoff was discussed. The applicant was informed of the need for a plan for the removal of the boathouse with stabilizing of the area possibly through retaining walls. If retaining walls are required, a conditional-use permit would also be required. The Planning Commission would review the plans for approval which would be forwarded to the Council for final approval. It was reemphasized that the code only allows for a 4x8' landing on the access stairs. Schroeder moved, Nolan seconded, to table application #1999 until the April Planning Commission meeting. At that time, the applicant will present a plan for the boathouse removal, hill stabilization, and landing; amending the original application to a conditional use permit. Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#5) #2001 POWDER PACKERS, INC./RHONDA E. WILSON, 640 ORCHARD PARK ROAD - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 8:22 -8:36 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicant, Ms. Filson, was present. The application is for a front/street setback variance where 100' is required, for a 33x23' garage and 4x12' entry. The setback proposed is for 75' at the entry addition and 71.'7' at the garage addition where the existing residence is located at 757. There is an existing overhang that travels the length of the residence. The proposed entry would extend 2' beyond the overhang. When the house was originally built in 1959, the five -acre zone standards did not apply. The property is 4.79 acres in a 5 -acre zone, which had been changed after the construction of this house. The addition will meet the required 10' separation setback from the tennis court. Smith asked why the garage was moved forward from the rest of the house. The applicant responded that this provided a thru corridor right into the house entry door. The driveway plans were shown to the commissioners. 6 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 0 ( #5 - #2001 - Powder Packers, Inc./Rhonda Wilson - Continued) Peterson commented that the plans are consistent with the neighborhood. He voiced concern with the location of a water pipe he saw that was located close to the sewer. It was reported that the pvc pipe was buried and came up at this point and fed off the main well but adequate distance separated the well and septic. Smith inquired of the deadline date for sewer connection. The applicant said that although the number of bedrooms increased from 3 to 4, this did not increase the square footage. Applicant did note that the sewer would be updated during 1995. Mabusth reported seeing water pocketing near the culvert on the westside in the ditch area. The culvert will need to be checked to ensure it is working properly. Smith noted that the tennis court is non- conforming. A variance would be required if any structural changes would be needed. Rowlette moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2001 for front street setback variance with the three conditions listed pertaining to the septic, the culvert, and the tennis court. Ayes 7, Nays 0. Is ( #6) #2003 ART AND KATHY HENNINGSEN, 975 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 8:36 -8:54 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Henningsen, were present. The application is for an average lakeshore setback variance. The screen porch and deck improvements are all located in front of the average Lakeshore setback line as are portions of the house. Because of the shape of the property, the hardcover improvement is concentrated in the 75 -250' zone. Hardcover exists at 32.49 %. 1052 s.f. of new hardcover is to be added and 1184 s.f of hardcover is to be removed. 712 s.f or 2.8% of proposed structural hardcover shall be traded with the removals of 1184 s.f. of nonstructural hardcover. The grade level patio has not been included as structural hardcover. The brick patio is being removed as part of hardcover tradeoffs. The property is 2.3 acres in LR -1B zoning district, requiring one acre in area. The impact on the lake view for the neighbors was discussed. There has been no problem voiced. Council member Jabbour, who is a neighbor, commented that he has no problem with the home location. Rowlette commented that the Gilbert family, neighbors of this property, hadn't voiced any concern, and had also received the same average lakeshore • setback variance. LJ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 (#6 - #2003 - Art and Kathy Henningsen - Continued) There were no public comments. Mabusth reported on the drainage system for the property. Water drains from the wetland to the SE under two culverts, into a pond, to an underground 100' culvert, located under the applicant's driveway pavement, with an outlet at the grassed lakeshore yard draining along a line of pine trees eventually to lake. No erosion was noted. Mabusth was unaware of erosion problems of lakeshore bank area. Once the plastic is removed around house, Mabusth and Nolan both said this might bring flooding problems to the lower level. The applicant said that the builder assessed the hardcover in relation to drainage. The builder plans to build up around the foundation with soil. Water has pooled in the lower level entry. The drain tile pumped water out but drained back into the house. The grading needs to be looked at. Commission members were asked for their viewpoints. Schroeder is concerned with making a distinction between structural and non - structural hardcover. Nolan commented favorably on the use of natural vegetation between the house and lake. Lindquist thought the plan was ambitious but had no problem with it. He earlier made note of the large • amount of up -front structure with the two patios and deck in comparison with the hardcover removals required. Rowlette noted the long narrow lot and how that resulted in the hardcover pooling in one area. • Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2003 with the understanding that the plastic under the rock and hardcover removal be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. Detail grading and drainage plans will need to be reviewed by City Engineer. Ayes 7, Nays 0. SKETCH PLAN REVIEWS ( #7) #2002 WILLM SMITH, 2580 FOX STREET - SKETCH PLAN /SUBDIVISION Mabusth reported that this is a sketch plan for a subdivision of three lots. The French Lake Upper Basin has been redefined as wetland and is no classified as a protected lake. The property is no longer located within a shoreland area. The RR -1 B zoning requires two acres of continuous dry land. 8 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 ( #7 - 42002 - William Smith - Continued) This plan is for a division of a two -lot subdivision originally approved in 1985. There is adequate area to meet requirements of a back lot division with 7+ acres. The applicant was advised in 1985 that future access considerations required access conforming to a 3- lot subdivision. The City acquired no underlying access easement over the roadway in the adjacent RLS division. The owner of the RLS said he would never approve any easement or curb cut. This results in only two options, A and B, for the applicant, not three as proposed. Mabusth reported that the existing driveway comes very close to the wetland. 26' setback is required. A separate conditional use and variance application was filed with the original subdivision application that would allow encroachment of protected wetland for drive to north. The barn on the property was placed in front of the principal structure also requiring a variance review. The drainage comes from both the northeast and northwest into a large wetland and continues draining through a drainageway along the driveway to French Lake Basin wetland. Option A calls for the use of the existing driveway to serve all three. The northern lot meets the back lot requirement but a 30' driveway outlot can only serve 2 lots per code. There is 2.12 acres to the west of the easement maintaining the required continuous 2 acres for the new building envelope. • Option B calls for a 60' wide private road with a cul -de -sac along the eastern border. Major portions will be located within a designated wetland area. Mabusth said that in 1985, the applicants chose to develop a shared access drive and did not attempt to acquire an access off the RLS drive. Rowlette noted that this application is similar to the problem faced with the Cloutier application previously discussed. Rowlette suggested a possible new curb cut off of Fox Street to service new lot. Schroeder said this would require a new curb cut. Schroeder also said that during discussions with the neighbors, the property was always planned to have 3 lots. Nolan asked about upgrading of the existing driveway to a road. Mabusth responded that the setback from a wetland prevented this option. Due to the narrowness of the available land for the driveway, it must remain a driveway but does need upgrading. A loop turnaround was noted to be in lot 2 for emergency vehicles. The Applicant, Bill Smith, would like to keep the driveway, making necessary improvements, and possibly upgrading it with a passing area if necessary. He preferred the aesthetically - pleasing look of the driveway to a cul -de -sac road. Smith said that one possible buyer asked about keeping the barn. Commissioners informed Smith that 3 acres are needed to allow the keeping of one horse. • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 ( #7 - #2002 William Smith - Continued) In discussing the RLS road to the west, the Applicant reported having spoken to the owners, and specifically, Keith Anderson, who pays for the maintenance. Anderson reportedly said he sees no benefit to others using the private road and does not wish to blacktop it. Rowlette said if the applicant desires a third lot, this should be where the access comes from. Another option discussed was a new driveway from Fox Street, either with a new curb cut or the use of the existing curb cut with an immediate turn to the west. Mabusth said she would check with Gerhardson regarding a new curb cut; but at this time, she was not certain that this option would meet Council's approval. During Commission discussion, Nolan said that the the current driveway would need upgrading, even if maintained with two lots, as no maintenance has been done on it. Nolan also said that this proposal has never been done in the past and sees no reason to allow it at this time. Mabusth responded that we have discussed what the code requires and have not examined the statement of hardships prepared by applicant seeking variances to code requirements. Rowlette said she was interested in using the other curb cut off of Fox Street, and does not see the property as having three lots. Rowlette read from the 1985 resolution where this issue was discussed. The resolution determined at that time that the subdivision could only be done if code could be met. Lindquist felt that a separate curb cut and separate driveway were the only alternatives. Mabusth was asked if City had ever approved a 3 lot division served by a driveway. Mabusth referred to the Stronghold subdivision in the 1980's that allowed for a variance and approved access via a driveway. Schroeder responded that an aesthetic argument is not a good reason for a variance and saw Fox Run as the best alternative. His second choice was use of the original driveway, and third best, another private road. Schroeder said the applicant needed to exhaust all avenues with obtaining the use of Fox Run as an access. If this is not obtainable, Nolan and Rowlette said it was their opinion that this was not a subdivision. Mabusth concurred that the use of the existing driveway, the new road off the existing road, or the new curb cut were not viable options unless the commission were willing to approve the necessary variances. The code calls for a private road to serve three lots. 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 ( #7 - 92002 - William Smith - Continued) Schroeder asked that the city check with the attorney on the affect on the lot as unbuildable if no variance were granted. Mabusth said that the Comprehensive Plan allows for three lots on a driveway but the subdivision code requires a private road. The attorney said that the code has precedence over the Comprehensive Plan. Schroeder asked Mabusth about oudots. Mabusth said that lot 2 has 3+ acres, and there would be no issue with the size of outlots. The Commissioners were asked by the chair their final thoughts regarding the plan. Lindquist asked if the engineer would approve a "y" within a curb cut. Mabusth thought this would be a possibility. Lindquist said a new curb cut off Fox Street or access from Fox Run or not buildable. Berg agreed with this. Peterson preferred access off Fox Run. He did not wish to see a new curb cut and thought a "y" would be better but not preferred. Schroeder preferred Fox Run. He would like the attorney to look at the situation and determine why it ended up as it now is. Rowlette did not want to set a precedent with three lots on a driveway. She was unsure of her feelings on the "y ". Nolan agreed with this. Smith preferred Fox Run, then a new curb cub, and then the "y ". ( #8) #2004 ROBERT MELAMED, 920 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SOUTH - • SKETCH PLAN /SUBDIVISION Robert Melamed and Ron Lauer were present. • Mabusth reviewed the property and the issues involved. This is a 15 acre subdivision in a heavily wooded area, owned by the Carpenter family, with designated wetlands and types I and II not designated on City's wetland maps. The applicant has a purchase agreement with the Carpenter trust. The property is surrounded by Old Crystal Bay Road on the west and driveway to the south and east. The drainage flows from the north to the designated wetland, then east via a culvert under drive and eventually to French Lake lower basin. The applicant has asked the commission to look at the findings and hardships. The code would require an internal road as well as a cul -de -sac. This plan results in the removal of 660 trees and the filling of 2400 s.f of wetland type 1 and 2, and major portions of designated wetland for access to the east lot. Peterson asked if access from the driveway to the north was a possibility. The applicant said it was not as it would require turning the driveway into a road. This would also require depletion of a forest area. Another option would be to come in off of Old Crystal Bay Road. 11 lr� u MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 ( #8 - #2004 - Robert Melamed - Continued) The applicant reported the ability to get adequate septic area for 5 to6 lots. Septic sites were in non - forested areas. The covenant in future deeds would restrict removal of trees. It is the applicant's desire to create a development that does not look like one, and one which cannot be seen from Old Crystal Bay Road. The applicant wished to create the least amount of impact on the forestation areas which resulted in 4 lots. The applicant said that this would be the minimum that is economically "doable" as there was no negotiation with the purchase price. Two safe access points can be located at the western boundary of the property. The most northern will provide a shared access to lots 1 and 2. If the access to lot 3 is changed to a shared driveway with lot 4, it would require a 300' access easement for lot 4. The shared driveway would have an impact on the buildable lot or it could be replatted. This avoids the use of the City road. Smith suggested access to lot #1 from the property to the north. Then she suggested dropping down between lots 2 and 3 and putting in a driveway with a "y" serving 2 and 3, south of the wetland. Smith suggested no road from Old Crystal Bay Road but the use of the City drive to access 4. This would avoid the wetland areas. The applicant responded • that the City would probably not allow this, and it also does not solve the private road issue. • The applicant prefers plan A. If this is acceptable, then asks what to do with the City driveway. Applicant said he is prepared to upgrade it but would like to consider the impact on the park and neighborhoods if upgraded to a City road. He also reported having met with Zetterstrom from the County, who asked that fencing be removed, and would grant curb cuts. Nolan suggested leaving lots I and 2 as shown but accessing 3 where 4 is shown as the road has to be upgraded anyways. Lot 4 could be accessed at the eastside of City drive. This would take out few trees and no wetlands would need to be crossed. Flint reported that this would be too close to the French Creek Preserve. He said the Park Commission has the right to ask for 8% for Park Dedication and has determined that the land on the east end, about 1.2 acres, approximately 600' long, with a depth of 87, would be a good option. A house plan would have to be changed but this land is virtually forested. It could be left as a natural corridor and is consistent with the results of the survey. It would act as a delinear park. It now has a deer run which would be left open for that use. 12 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 i ( #8 - 42004 - Robert Melamed - Continued) Flint also spoke of where the bike/hike trail will possibly come in along this property. The backbone of the trail is Old Crystal. Bay Road which then extends to the new access apoint to Maxwell Bay. Flint said one way for the trail would come down Old Crystal Bay Road but would be difficult to build. Another way would be to come over Fox Street on Rainy Road, which is north of this area in question, and come down east of the subject property. The trail is 8' wide and requires a minimum of a 14' easement. Lindquist has suggested the trail running east of the MWCC lift station through the City property but Flint said this would impact the preserve area. Council Member Jabbour asked for discussion on the City/Park driveway becoming a road. Flint did not desire for this to occur. Jabbour said it would be good to pool the Council's opinion on the use of the City driveway. Jabbour asked the applicant what kind of arrangement he now has with the City to get to his house, which is located near the subject property. Melamed said he maintains the driveway along with the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. Whoever gets there first, plows it. He has an easement to use this driveway. Jabbour said that preserving the area is the main issue. isBerg questioned whether there is a 4th buildable lot. • The applicant summarized his position. He said he personally will be impacted as a neighbor. Two curb cuts will minimize effect on park and wetlands. A third would be proposed located on the south side. The applicant plans on redredging the pond at the southeast corner to the shape it originally was before the City filled it. He will make it a natural wildlife pond. Smith would like the applicant to look at her concept. Smith would like to see lot 4 accessed from the City drive. The Commissioners gave their opinions of the project. Nolan is in concurrence with the use of the City drive but would like to have a shared access at the City drive rather than a curb cut off Old Crystal Bay Road for safety reasons. He would propose both lots 3 and 4 access at 4 or take 4 around to the east. Rowlette agreed with Nolan. Lindquist also agreed with Nolan, combining the access for 3 and 4. Lindquist also was in agreement with Flint and the dedication of the 8 %. Peterson felt that the basic project was good. Schroeder agreed with Nolan's ideas on upgrading the City road. Schroeder commented to Flint if the main trail was on Old Crystal Bay Road and found less than 87' on the east, to maintain a portion for the west side. 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 • ( #9) #1500 MICHAEL PLANK, 4115 WATERTOWN ROAD - REQUEST FOR CONCEPTUAL DIRECTION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION 1�1 Neither the applicant nor representive were present. Rowlette moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application # 1800 until the applicant could be present. Ayes 7, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS ( #Io) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 13,1995 - CHARLES NOLAN Nolan reported that the Crystal Creek Subdivision application and Carlson application were approved under the consent agenda at the Council meeting. The Council supported the Jundt application requiring removal of the 25' of paved road, even though aesthetically not pleasing but noting that the law is the law. The Council also would like to see the Jundt's present a comprehensive plan. Nolan said Applicant Pert did not come to the meeting. Council moved to table his application and would act on it at their next meeting with or without the presence of the applicant. The Lebedoff application was approved. Nolan said the DNR changed its viewpoint, giving approval to the 20' setback. The Wicklund application was approved as recommended. ( #11) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Schroeder reported on the change in chair for meetings. Chairmanship will be rotated with Peterson being chair during April, and Rowlette to co- chair. The purpose of rotation is to allow all members an opportunity to become more involved in the meetings. Schroeder suggested that Park Commission Chair Richard Flint attend the tour at the Freshwater Institute as it would be a good resource for the Park Commission. Schroder moved, Nolan seconded, to change the meeting time of the Planning Commission. to 6:30 p.m. Ayes 7, Nays 0. 14 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 20, 1995 (#11 - Other Issues for Discussion - Continued) Rowlette made several comments on the meeting with the Park Commission. She said it was an important discovery that the Planning Commission could take land instead of money for park dedication. Rowlette felt this would be a great tool in future applications. The Park Commissioners had noted that they did not get copies of Planning Commission activities until after they had occurred. Mabusth said that preliminary subdivision application forms were now being sent to the members of the Park Commission. Rowlette suggested that the Park Commissioners send a representative to the Planning Commission meetings. Mabusth said that Flint would like to see sketch plan reviews. Schroeder commented that the Park Commission is a powerful planning tool for the Planning Commission. He also noted the need to take into account the trail system in future planning. It was reported that Park Dedication can take 8% of any undeveloped land where a subdivision is going to be done. Rowlette said the Park Commission is also going to have available maps of large parcels of land to identify that land in which they are interested for fixture park development. Schroeder commented on the need for the Park Commission to come up with a plan for future park land for the City. There is financial incentive for people to give large parcels/easements to relieve themselves of the tax burden. • ADDITIONAL ITEMS ( #12) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 22, 1995 MEETING • Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of February 22, 1995. Ayes 7, Nays 0. ( #13) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND THE APRIL 10, 1995 MEETING OF THE COUNCIL Dale Lindquist will attend the Council Meeting of 4/10/95. ADJOURNMENT Schroeder moved, Peterson seconded, to adjourn at 11:10 p.m. 15 arles Schroeder, Chair Person