Laserfiche WebLink
■t <br />4. <br />5. <br />6. <br />7. <br />The plat of *‘Senn Orono Addition” was approved two years before adoption of <br />Orono’s Shoreland Ordinance and one year prior to enactment of the WCA. Neither <br />lot has ever been built on, and the driveway approved in 1990 was likewise never <br />constructed. Applicants are prop sing a complete lot line rearrangement and re-plat <br />of the property to allow relocation of the proposed driveway, which today would not <br />be approved in its 1990 configuration due to Shoreland restrictions, and to allow for <br />slight revisions in potential house locations. The new plat is subject to 'front lot/back <br />lot’ area and setback standards which were also not in effect in 1990. <br />The proposed re-plat consists of two residential lots each meeting the minimum 2.0 <br />acres contiguous dry buildable lot area requirement of the RR-IB Zoning District. <br />Proposed Lot 2 meets the 200' width requirement. Proposed Lot 1 requires a <br />variance to the minimum 200' lot width requirement as measured at the rear of the <br />defined front yard. The basis for the width variance is as follows: A primary issue for <br />development of Lot 1 is access. The proposed access along the easterly boundary of <br />Lot 2 has impacts on the shape and development potential of Lot 2. The current <br />proposal correctly assumes that variances would not be granted to allow the driveway <br />to parallel the creek within the required 75' hardcover/grading setback from the creek <br />bank. Assuming that a wetland/creek crossing within Lot 1 would ultimately be <br />approved, then the proposed 30' corridor along the east boundary of Lot 2 and <br />skirting the hillside in the south half of Lot 1, is a reasonable driveway location <br />because it avoids the 75' creek protection zone except at the point of actual creek <br />crossing. However, in order for the driveway to skirt the hill and not encroach into <br />Lot 2, Outlot A is shortened and Lot 1 extends southward p ist the base of the hill. <br />This is the hardship that supports the lot width variance for Lot 1. <br />The proposed re-plat meets the “front lot/back lot” standards of the Zoning Code with <br />regards to lot areas and with regards to placement of a residence structure on <br />proposed Lot 1 meeting the more restrictive ‘back lot’ setback requirements. <br />Each lot will be served by private wells and individual onsite sewage treatment <br />systems. Septic system site evaluation and design information has been submitted <br />confirming that each lot coi.tains suitable primary and alternate drainfreld sites to serve <br />the proposed residences. The elevation of the sites in Ix)t 1 is generally at least 1.5' <br />or more above the 100 year flood elevation, and 3.5' above the delineated wetland <br />elevation. <br />Page 2 of 9 <br />L-.