Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,January 21,2020 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> it would be a disapproval but with the recommendation that it not do anything other than allow the City to <br /> discuss with both parties how to work the situation out. <br /> Erickson clarified that Gettman suggested approval. <br /> Gettman indicated he said disapproval and that either way it will go to the Council.The only way it <br /> would not go to Council is if the Commission tabled it. <br /> Barnhart and Oakden confirmed Gettman's statement. <br /> Oakden said she does not believe this is an outlot but that it is a lot of record and so it could be built on, <br /> according to Code. <br /> Gettman apologized for using that reference and stated there does not appear to be any other access. <br /> Oakden agreed and said the applicant is making the request because there is no access. <br /> Gettman stated that is why it is appropriate to call it an outlot. For practical purposes it makes sense as far <br /> as what the applicant is trying to do,but it does not make any sense to do it over the utility because it is <br /> affecting the neighbor and the applicant can still access the other lot from his current lot. <br /> Barnhart noted the back lot is an existing lot of record.By not permitting access through a protected <br /> easement it could be seen as a regulatory taking, so Staff is trying to correct that.He referenced Gettman's <br /> use of the word "practical" and said that is important.That is why Staff is supporting the variance. The <br /> property owner has a right to improve the property,and if they can demonstrate to the Planning <br /> Commission and City Council's satisfaction that there is a practical difficulty for 200 Bederwood to <br /> provide access,that is how the City corrects it. <br /> Barnhart said the Commission is welcome to recommend denial because of X, Y,and Z reasons,which he <br /> has not heard. The issue with the sanitary sewer easement is an important part of it but is not the only <br /> reason.He referenced comments about the easement as shown may impact the existing trees in that area. <br /> Trees aren't a practical difficulty. One could make the comment that the easement be shifted to cover the <br /> existing sanitary sewer line which kind of addresses two issues:the commenter, and the sewer service <br /> line.He stated the property owner did not create the lot configuration. He inherited the problem,and he is <br /> trying to correct it in the same manner that a property owner on a lake that is too small that wants to <br /> rebuild or build a structure. <br /> Gettman said if 3568 purchased the other vacant lot,they would not have access to it.The 200 has direct <br /> access to that lot.He is not sure he follows the taking because at this point the 200 has access to the lot, <br /> they just don't have access to that lot from a street. <br /> Mr. Mueller said when the sewer was put in there,there was a driveway and a concrete culvert going to <br /> that lot which the applicant drives their truck through all the time. <br /> Gettman said that is their access point. <br /> Mr.Mueller stated the applicant wants to move it towards them.He said the applicant does not want the <br /> driveway in the middle of the lot,but when he bought it,that was already there. <br /> Page 6 of 14 <br />