Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />VILLAGE OF ORONO <br />Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission, <br />June 18, 1973 *7:35 P,n. <br />The Planning Commission met on the above <br />date with the following members present: <br />Acting Ciiairman Kullberg, Elliott, Gasch, <br />Guthrie, Paurus, and Searles. Absent: <br />Chairman Poisson, Hays, Kokesh, Ryerse. <br />and Van Nest. <br />Searles moved, Gutnrie seconded, that the <br />ilinutes of the Regular ’leetiiig of May 21, <br />1973, be approved. Motion, Ayes (6) - Nays (0). <br />MINUTES <br />ifr. Johnston has requested that he oe allowed <br />to replat Lots 1-5 and Lots 24-29 of Saga <br />Hill Revised, to create four building sites. <br />Acting Chairman Kullberg asked Mr. Harston <br />whetaer the question about the actual location <br />of the road had been clarified. The problem <br />is that County Road flSl is not located on <br />the 66’ easement, but according to Mr. Marston's <br />calculations, the size of proposed Lots 1-4 <br />excluued that portion of Mr. Johnston's property <br />tiiat was under the existing roadway. The total <br />acreage, however, which is listed at 3.1 acres, <br />differs from the sum of the four lots because <br />It does not exclude the roadway. Mr. Wagensteen, <br />representing Mr. Johnston, explained that his <br />client would be willing to plat the new lots <br />as it is shown on their map anj would forego <br />the property under the existing <br />DIVISION 8 VARIANCE <br />Johnston i <br />Searles felt that this request was appropriate <br />for the area but not appropriate given the <br />existing zoning standards for the area. It was <br />nis feeling that a variance for half of the <br />acreage requirement amounts to a rezoning without <br />formal requirements of rezoning. In addition to raising tiie question about the <br />appropriateness of rezoning by variance, there <br />was concern as to whether there was a hardship involved. <br />Guthrie moved, Elliott seconded, that the <br />preliminary plat be approved with a size and <br />width variance because the lots are sewered <br />and assessed for five units; the shape of the <br />property is unique and therefore it would be <br />difficult to conform to the one acre requirements; <br />and such a development would be compatible with <br />the surrounding area. Motion, Ayes (6) - Nays (0)