02-13-2023 City Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. that is the outline of the peat bog. There is a curb cut there that has been existing for some time going out to County Road 15 that splits the lot line between 2474 and 2480. So that has been existing for quite a few years and that would be the proposed access driveway that we would use for the two lots. Johnson said the creation of a new lots and with variances is not something he'd support for a new lot. Walsh said this council has stayed away from creating lots that need variances. Seals said she called staff earlier today about Items 17 and 18, and was trying to understand what was different from when the Council reviewed this parcel before. I appreciate wanting to have something there but to be consistent with what we said back when we reviewed it last time,I would not be supportive of creating additional lots with more non-conformities. Benson said she was in agreement. Walsh indicated he would go on to Item No. 18 on the agenda which is a related parcel. 18. LA22-000069,BRETT AND AMANDA LARSON,2480 CARMAN STREET, SKETCH PLAN Oakden said 2480 Carman is the property referenced to the east of the parcel just discussed but slightly larger. As existing today it's 1.85 acres of land above high water. The property has a new home with a building permit issued in 2022 for the southern portion of this inlet.Again, it has the challenge of that split-zoning with the LR1B one-acre minimum on the southern portion of the lagoon and the LR1 C 1 half -acre minimum on the northern portion. The applicant's goal is to facilitate a new building site north of the inlet. Similar to the 2020 application,the northern portion is conforming today. The southern portion would be substandard to area as it does not meet one acre in area. They meet the width in this application, so just one variance would be needed in the sketch as proposed.It was a similar discussion by commissioners in that they commented on a shared driveway access. Concerns about creating new non- conforming variances was also discussed. You are directed to provide feedback to the applicant based on this discussion. The applicant did submit an alternate plan which was emailed out to you this afternoon. That can be discussed as well. Seals questioned whether in dividing the parcel if the new construction would still be conforming. She asked if that house was built based on the totality of that whole lot. Oakden said she believed the applicant designed the house with the division in mind. Even if they were to divide,their intent is to meet the hardcover and structural coverage still today with that new house if they just have the southern lot. Staff has not done a full analysis of that to verify those numbers. To comment on the submitted alternate plan before you,they provided a long 25-foot width strip of land that touches Shoreline Drive that would be accountable to lot two to then meet the one-acre minimum. That would resolve the need for a lot area variance as it's proposed. However,this does create a unique flag-shaped lot with some land not attached and not accessible to the building envelope, which staff raised concern about to the applicant. Staff would also recommend a rezoning necessary with this alternate plan, as we Page 7 of 16