My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-30-2020 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2020
>
03-30-2020 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2020 3:43:17 PM
Creation date
6/8/2020 2:52:39 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, March 9, 2020 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />Mr. Edwards said he does not understand how a house on 2490 could be approved that was not there <br />before. <br />Walsh stated the Council could not comment on something they have no knowledge about and that the <br />incident did not happen two years ago. <br />Mr. Edwards stated the buildings were two years ago but the approval process was probably in 2017. He <br />believes there is an additional house that was not there before on nonconforming lots that were not there <br />before. The density actually increased in the zoning area, which does not make sense to him. <br />Walsh and Crosby said the Council cannot comment on or answer for something another Council might <br />have done. <br />Walsh also indicated it is not the City Council's job to find a solution, only to give guidance. <br />Mr. Gamble asked if 2480 decides to go ahead, which meets the width requirement and it has a small area <br />that would have to change, could that be allowed. <br />Johnson told Mr. Gamble that he would need to present the facts. <br />Mr. Gamble said he submitted all of the information. <br />Walsh explained that basically Mr. Gamble was asking the City Council to approve a nonconforming lot <br />from a conforming lot. He does not think the Council has ever done that. <br />Barnhart explained that the discussion has been about the sketch plan, and the formal application would <br />be to apply for a variance and the applicant would have to prove practical difficulties. It would be <br />reviewed at a public hearing by the Planning Commission and Council. If the Council approves the <br />variance, he could submit his preliminary plat. <br />Crosby noted the applicant could not create his own practical difficulty. <br />Mr. Gamble asked if there was somewhere he could go at the City to see if a precedent has been set. <br />Barnhart stated Mr. Gamble would have to provide a data request for specific information and the City <br />would then provide that. That would be done with the City Clerk's office. <br />Walsh commented that he would need to build his argument with similar situations that have occurred. <br />Seals noted there were plenty of weird situations around the lake, depending on what you buy. <br />Page 16 of 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.