Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE MAY 21, 1990 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. <br />The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the <br />following members present: Chairman Kelley and Planning <br />Commissioners Johnson, Hanson, Cohen, Moos and Bellows. The <br />following represented the City Staff: Building and Zoning <br />Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning <br />Administrator Gaffron and City Recorder Scheffler. Council <br />Representative Goetten waa also present, as was Councilmember <br />Callahan. <br />|15>;1 AiMOND KREB <br />IIS OJ.:> CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH <br />PRELTWlNARY SUBDIVISION <br />PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 P.M. TO 7:15 P.M. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were <br />duly noted. <br />Mr. Gary Peterson was present as a representative for the <br />applicant. <br />Zoning Administrator Mabusth summarized the information <br />contained in her memo dated May 15, 1S90, regarding this <br />appliccicion. <br />Kelley questioned whether it would be appropriate to define <br />the front and rear yards of Lot 2, Block 2, at this time. <br />Mabusth agreed that it would be appropriate to do so because <br />of the creation of a through lot. <br />Kelley believed that it would be the intention of the City <br />to achieve access to that lot ♦^rom Outlot A. <br />Mabusth advised the Planning Commission that the City Code <br />requires a conditional use permit for all accessory structures on <br />a through lot. Mabusth referred to another application wherein a <br />permanent conditional use permit would be approved as part of the <br />subdivision for all through lots as long as such structures met <br />the required rear/street setback. She asked Kelley whether <br />Planning Commission would consider similar action with this <br />application as well. <br />Mr. Peterson noted that staff's memo states that additional <br />septic testing is required for Lot 1, Block 1, rather than Lot 1, <br />Block 2. <br />Cohen asked whether any specific time period has been <br />established for the applicant's continued use of the existing <br />access serving Lot 2. Block 2. <br />Mabusth replied that the present driveway will continue to <br />serve the property until such time that construction of a new <br />- 1 -