06-18-2001 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PI-.\NNING COMMISSION Monday. May 21.2001 (MM.267S DONNA LILE. CONTINUED) Weinberger slated he Mould prefer the Planning Commission make a recommendation on both parts of this application rather than tabling one part of it. Stoddard reiterated he Mould be Milling to approve the second part of the application but that he Mould prefer to gel some input from the Cit> Council on Die first part before acting on it. Stoddard stated he Mould be hesitant to approve the first part of the application given the small si/e of the lot and the zoning requirements for this area. Weinberger stated bi>ih options w'uld be presented to the Council. Kluth commented the Planning Commission has only been presented M ith one example of Mhat might be a similar situation, with StalT indicating that there might be other examples that exist on both sides over the years regarding other similar properties. Kluth slated in his view the Planning Commission should look at this application in today's tenns and look at recent precedent and how the City Council would deal with this. Smith staled if port one of the application were approved, the Applicant would be UH>king at some very sev ere restrictions on what could be constructed on the property due to the small si/e of the lot. Kluth inquired if this property were deemed to be buildable. whether they would be retroactively assessed the sewer charge. Gaffron stated they would be. Siisddard inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to table part one of the application or have the Planning Commission act on both parts tonight. Stoddard noted he probably would not be in support of approv mg part one at this time. Stoddard stated if part one was tabled, that may allow the Applicant time to conduct further research to determine whether other similar applications have been approved in the past. Roesicr stated she would like the Planning Commission to act on both parts of her application tonight. Berg stated if the two lots were combined, the Applicant would not be able to build on the lakeshore lot. Berg statexi the Applicant could build on the back lot. Smith commented the Planning Commission needs to act on what is before them tonight and not what happened twenty some years ago. StixJdard noted Orono’s Comprehensive Plan has changed over those 28 years. Waldron stated he understands it is the City ’s desire not to have residences constructed on these 50 foot lots, but the point that the Applicant is making is that this application cannot be looked at in isolation due to the history of the other similar lot and that the applicable ordinances have not changed. Waldron stated this is the exact same fact situation and exact same request and exact same ordinances as that situation which existed a number of years. Waldron stated they would like the City to explain how they differ. PAGE 14 •**n r-»