01-17-2023 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday, August 24, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 8 Applicant is somewhat fixed by the side lot lines and again it’s up to the Council’s discretion whether or not they want to support a subdivision that creates a non-conforming lot. He said the issue or comment he wants to make in regards to this situation is the non-conforming width is what is there now, this subdivision does not improve it, nor does it hurt it. Barnhart said they’d get to the driveway coming up later. This subdivision does not increase the non-conformity nor help the non-conformity in terms of width for the Southern portion of the lot. Walsh said typically or historically the Council doesn’t approve subdivisions that do not meet the current requirements. Barnhart replied for a lot width he cannot remember an approval, and there are other standards in play that Council has supported in the past, the driveway for example. Walsh stated as that is his background statement, what would be Barnhart’s recommendation and why would he and Staff be recommending it. Barnhart answered he doesn’t know if he has a recommendation, the point here is to see if Council is comfortable having a situation where they will create a lot that is non-conforming. He noted most other scenarios where they are creating a non-conforming lot it is an easy and fast no for Staff not to recommend it and Council not to support it. In this situation it’s a little different in the sense that they did not create that as a conformity issue. Johnson stated the question is whether the Council will allow a subdivision on a lot that is already non- conforming to be divided even though it is a lawful non-conforming lot right now. Barnhart answered yes that is very well put and is exactly the question in the memo. Johnson said it’s a non-conforming lot that extends over water to the other side, which has its own repercussions, and asked for example, if someone wanted more hardcover on one side, would they go across the bay to someone on the other side to subdivide. He said it opens up some questions for him. Barnhart asked to hear feedback from the Council, noting the Applicant is here and can address any questions. With the Council’s feedback they will come back and the Applicant will decide whether or not to move forward with the project. Don Gamble, 10704 Water Lily Lane, Woodbury, addressed the Council and noted it’s been a long, strange time since March but they have endeavored to move forward while addressing everything that is possible. Two years ago, this process started with the City and they were looking at lots on the North side having different half-acre zoning and were looking at something entirely different. He stated they’ve been following the guidance to subdivide the lots and noted the driveway services two homes but it runs across a third property to get to the road and that is part of the problem, which is kind of an unchangeable problem. He also said until the first meeting in March, they didn’t realize they could use land North of the lagoon to satisfy the one-acre and that is what they’ve attempted to do here. Mr. Gamble said they have talked about the wetlands with the District and they responded that 400 feet is no big deal. They also talked about vacating all the wetlands and offsetting and other things and the District said that is a little bigger process. Therefore, this is the process to see if they can even subdivide the lots, and if they can, they will certainly work hard with the Watershed District to see what they can do right and the best way to offset if needed. He noted one of the things found in looking at records was when a culvert was