Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,February 13,2023 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> house,we dropped to 25.6 percent.We just want the historical use;that was always as a guest house for <br /> our property--it was divided off in 1978. I'm not sure how that happened but we're trying to put it back <br /> and then benefit another property at the same time,because then they'll own to the road and drop their <br /> driveway easement. <br /> Johnson moved, Seals seconded, to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve LA22-000065, <br /> 2967 Casco Point Rd. Variances.VOTE: Ayes 3,Nays 1 (Benson). <br /> 17. LA22-000060,JOHN GRZYBEK O/B/O WARD EDWARDS,2474 CARMAN STREET, <br /> SKETCH PLAN <br /> Community Development Director Laura Oakden presented a sketch plan proposal and said Council was <br /> being asked for some informal feedback to the applicant regarding their proposed plan. 2474 Carman has <br /> a street frontage on Shoreline Drive and the lot is long and narrow with a lagoon that divides the land <br /> right in the middle.It also has an identified wetland on the property. The parcel as it sits today has about <br /> 1.6 acres of land above the ordinary high-water level.The lot is improved with a single-family home on <br /> the southern portion of that lagoon, and the property is relatively unique with a split zoning with the south <br /> side of the inlet being our LR1B which is a one-acre minimum and north of that inlet or lagoon area being <br /> half-acre minimum or LR1C1. The applicant is proposing to split the lot into two parcels right down the <br /> lagoon or the inlet area to facilitate a new building site north of the inlet. The north side is heavily <br /> wooded and includes that wetland and some grading area that drops off of Shoreline Drive. An <br /> application in 2020,which included this parcel and the parcel to the east at 2480, contemplated a <br /> subdivision of those two lots going from two lots to four lots.At that time Planning Commission and <br /> Council were not in favor of creating any new non-conforming parcels. With that analysis from 2020. <br /> today the existing parcel as it sits is non-conforming as relates to lot width. As proposed that northern <br /> parcel would meet the LR1C1 requirements of the half acre and the 100 foot while the southern parcel <br /> would require a lot area variance as proposed.It's .68 acres where one acre is required, and a lot with <br /> variance at 125 feet and with where 140 is required.For this application to move forward two variances <br /> would be needed. Commissioners discussed requiring a shared access between this parcel and the parcel <br /> to the east at 2480 Carman to limit access on Shoreline Drive and to work with that neighboring parcel. <br /> Overall, some of the Commissioners did support allowing the creation of a new single-family lot on that <br /> northern parcel. Commissioner Ressler noted he did not support creating a new substandard parcel with <br /> variances. Commissioners also discussed the potential for rezoning the area to be consistent with the <br /> neighborhood as this is unique with a split zoning to see if that resolves any concerns. Council should <br /> discuss if they are comfortable as proposed with the necessary variances for this application.You also <br /> should discuss concerns regarding the buildability with that area,based on the wetlands as shown.. <br /> Planning staff request feedback to the applicant identifying those issues brought up. <br /> Scott W Edwards,2474 Carmen Street, stated we've presented this before, and I guess nothing really <br /> substantially changed except for we had tried a number of other configurations. We feel the simplest way <br /> to do this and the most natural way is to split it in the middle of the lagoon. That's historical going back. <br /> These lots and the one at 2480 have always been thought of as two lots. Going back there was even,I <br /> think,two different tax ID parcels numbers, before the lagoon was dredged in the '60s,I believe. I would <br /> like to note that the wetland that is designated is a technical term. It's really just a peat bog. There's no <br /> standing water historically on that area,but we did have it surveyed,I think three or four years ago,and <br /> Page 6 of 16 <br />