Laserfiche WebLink
NIHUTBS OF THE PLANHING CONNISSIOH MEETING HBU) JULY 18, 1988 <br />ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. <br />The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following <br />members present: Chairman Kelley# Johnson# Moos# Cohen# and Hanson. Bro%m <br />arrived at 7:25 p.m. The following represented the City staff: Building & <br />Zoning Administrator Mabusth# Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator <br />Gaffron# and City Recorder Scheffler. CounciImember Peterson was also <br />present. <br />tl301 DAVID L. flHITE & FEEDRICK C. NHITE <br />180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE NEST <br />CLASS 3 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION <br />Mr. Fredrick White was present for this matter. <br />Gaffron explained the proposed subdivision# noting the location of the <br />existing house and garage. The Applicants propose to leave a 2+ acre <br />parcel with the existing house and also create a second buildable lot. <br />Their site evaluator found an alternate site for the existing house with <br />its proposed 3-acre parcel# but testing resulted in a recommendation by the <br />site evaluator to add about 1.3 acres to Lot 2 to accomodate drainfield <br />sites# leaving Lot 2 with about 4.8 acres total. Applicant has agreed to <br />this revision. They intend to leave Outlet A for future development. This <br />would result in a subdivision of three lots that would access from County <br />Road 84. The City Engineer# Glen cook# recommends that interior access be <br />developed for this property. Staff put together a diagram showing <br />anticipated development in the area. Mr. Armstrong# property owner to the <br />east# expressed concern about access. The Armstrong property could easily <br />be served by a road along it north boundary. The Olson property directly <br />North of Armstrongs could be served by a cul de sac. <br />Applicant stated that he doubted the ability to put a sewer system on <br />north part of the out lot due to topography# and was not sure whether there <br />would be enough land to put in a cul ue sac and still have 2 acre lots in <br />Outlot A. Hanson suggest<>d an alternate cul de sac location to avoid <br />access directly onto County Road 19. Gaffron suggested that a stipulation <br />of subdivision approval be that once an interior access road is developed# <br />all lots would have to access from it. <br />Hanson noted that a topographic map had not been submitted and Cohen <br />agreed that since the Outlot area is of concern as it relates to a <br />comprehensive development plan for the area# that topography would be <br />necessary. Hanson commented that# more than any parcel he has recently <br />seen# he feels that the total acreage here and development possibilities <br />adjacent really do require a more comprehensive approach to the <br />development. Mrs. Armstrong## who is the o%mer of property to the east and <br />south of Applicants stated that she is interested in the ability of coming <br />in with a road from 19 since they may wish to sell that property. She <br />questioned whether plans to do so would need to be written into the present <br />proposal. Mr. Kelley informed her that the dedication of 20 feet for <br />future roadway would probably be one of the conditions of the subdivision <br />on this property. Gaffron inquired whether road construction costs would <br />be shared given that 2 of Applicant's lots may ultimately require usage of <br />that road? Kelley commented affirmatively and went on to say that he