Laserfiche WebLink
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,February 13,2023 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Leslie Oare,2967 Casco Point Road, explained they purchased the home in 2018. The Swenson's long <br /> narrow part is in between their home and the Abbotts on the other side. Swensons used the home as a <br /> cabin. Their residence is in Fort Lauderdale, so they were only there four times a year. We always had <br /> conversations with the Abbotts that if Swensons were ever to sell that we could purchase it as the guest <br /> house was originally part of our property.Abbotts do not own to the road,partially because many years <br /> ago the road was in front of the homes between the homes and the lake. So the Abbotts want to solve that <br /> and be able to own to the road to get rid of the driveway easement and be a conforming property. The <br /> Swenson property is non-conforming; all three are non-conforming. We'd like to divide the Swenson <br /> property and make two conforming properties and get rid of the density of the house in the middle.We <br /> would be getting rid of a dock permit that has created many lawsuits. We've already removed the steps to <br /> the lake and there's a deck at the top of the stairs we plan to remove and then remove the large portion of <br /> the sidewalk between the guest house and the Abbot property. The Swenson home was 32.5 percent hard <br /> cover. Our home with an existing variance is at 29.6. Our property would drop to 25.6 percent. We're just <br /> trying to do a really good thing and not have another homeowner squeezed in between us who will <br /> inevitably want to put in a boat slip which wouldn't be allowed because of the dock permit. <br /> John Abbott,2941 Casco Point Road, is the other neighbor to this adjoining piece of property. Thank you, <br /> Leslie. She explained it nicely. We have a document in your packet that explains the neighbor situation.I <br /> just would point out that in this request there's not a stick of lumber, no physical changes to the site, <br /> except for the removal of hard cover and the elimination of density that's just too thick for the <br /> neighborhood. So,there's no bathroom being added;there's no expansion of the space being added.It's <br /> restoring it to what it was in the past, except that the density goes down and the hardcover is brought into <br /> a higher level of compliance. So I appreciate your consideration. <br /> Johnson said he would be very supportive of approving this application.I have gone along with these <br /> people on their process here.I think what we have is an existing condition with that house. They're <br /> cleaning it up,getting rid of the dock. It's an existing condition that actually cleans up.a long-term <br /> problem.I'm supportive of that. With respect to combining utilities, again,that's an existing condition. I <br /> see it as unnecessary to ask them to combine them with what is already in place. Something to note about <br /> these folks is when they were trying to do this originally,they came to the City to do it the right way. <br /> That's what I respect about what they're doing. There's probably examples of this out there.People are <br /> using(such structures)in a different way.By making it an ADU and putting some restrictions on who can <br /> use it,that's a benefit to the neighborhood. The neighbors are on board. So I'm in support of the <br /> application. <br /> Walsh said this is precursor to the ADU discussion. We put the ADU language together with our city <br /> attorney and it was really more geared for new construction.But as Matt said,this is an existing <br /> condition;you're cleaning up three lots into two lots. You're not really changing anything,you're solving <br /> problems.And so like Matt,I think the practical difficulty is that you do have an existing condition that <br /> conforms to the neighborhood in general,but just not to the ADU,which is more geared for brand new <br /> construction. I would be supportive as well. <br /> Page 4 of 16 <br />