10-03-1988 Planning Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MimiTBS OP THE PIAMIXfle C0MHI8SI08 MBBTXIiG OCTOBER 3, 198i .■"II IMCB 7s00 P.N. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley; Planning Commission members Johnsonr Cohen, Hanson and Moos. Planning Commission member Brown arrived at 7:20 p.m. The following represented the City staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative Edward Callahan, Jr. attended and CounciImember Goetten was also present. #1327 MfflOLD SOSXni 1100 ffILDHORST TRAIL CLASS III PRBLIMIRART SUBDIVISION PUBLIC BBARIB6 - 7s40 P.H. - 7:55 P.N. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was not present for this matter, however, Mr. Jim Krautkremer was present as a representative for Mr. Sorkin. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that this matter involved one acre, LR-lB zone, sewered, property. Applicant was proposing a Class III subdivision of 7 acres. Private wells will be used because municipal water is not available. Access to the three lots on the east side will be via Wildhurst Trail; access to the four lots on the west side will be through unimproved Garden Lane that will be constructed at the time the 30 lot subdivision that surrounds the Soskin property is approved. Planning Commission member Johnson asked if the Planning Commission had already reviewed that subdivision. Mabusth replied that there had been a sketch plan review only and the matter would be formally heard at the October 17, 1988, Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Kelley asked if it would not make more sense to do the entire plan all at once? Mr. Krautkremer explained that the reason for presenting the Soskin proposal now was due to the need for variances due to front yard widths along Wildhurst Trail. The required width is 140* and two of the lots only have 119*. The grades along in the front of those two lots is quite steep. The houses would be situated toward the front of the lots with tuckunder garages. There would be a common access between lots 6 & 7 so there will be only one exit between those two 1 ->ts. Planning Commission member Hanson asked whether the applicant was requesting a variance for two lots rather than three to replace lots 5, 6 and 7. Mr. Krautkremer stated that he wished to create the three lots as presented. Chairman Kelley clarified that the application was basically straight forward, with the exception of a lot width variance. Mabusth added that Lot 1 would require special consideration. Mr. Krautkremer explained that Lot 1 has a significant drainage ditch that will affect the buildability of that lot. When Garden Lane is