Laserfiche WebLink
minutes of the orono planning commission <br />MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 16, 1996 <br />(#4 - #2099 Loren Bnieggemann - Continued) <br />Schroeder agreed with Snuth and Lindquist. <br />GafiTon commented that the cabins were currently rented. He added that the Coundl had <br />given direction some time ago aUowing a fair period of time <br />cabin rental with no need to temporarily connect to sewer, but wi <br />connection required, which has not been done. <br />Schroeder said the hardships do not merit the number of vanances requested. <br />Proveau said that Maeser expressed concern xvith the sewer hookup issue. He noted that <br />the financial benefits of cabin rental were significant to Maeser-s ability to owning the <br />property Proveau said if the sale of the property were to tall through, Maeser wou <br />reque^the cabin be hooked up to sewer. Proveau asked that options be <br />e^ble Maeser to homestead the property noting that the code was the cause in the dec <br />of the market value of the property. <br />Lindquist responded that he had a problem with splitting up a 2-acre parcel in the 2 acre <br />zoning district. <br />Smith sufigested the possibiUty of purchasing additional property from the owner to the <br />nonh Ctaffron said there was probably not enough land to do that; but \vith one lot only, <br />a portion right be sold to that neighbor to increase his lot size. Bmeggernann said the <br />feLibilitv ofa sale of any land to or from the neighbor to the north was slum G^on said <br />the neighborhood redevelopment process, by which two lots would be purchased toge e <br />to create a more conforming single building site, is a slow process. <br />Mabusth noted that even if the area was re-zoned to 1 acre, variances would still be <br />required. Theie would still be the need for a total ol 2-1/2 acres including the outlot. <br />rcsultinu in a half acre shortage. <br />Schroeder asked the applicants if they would prefer the application be voted on or tabled. <br />Brueuvemann inquired about a joint session between the Council and Pl^ng <br />Commission to discuss the sketch plan. Gaffron said the application had not been <br />diLssed in the joint session though it was previously suggested that a discussion ensue <br />ren^ding the sketch plan. Gaffion informed the applicant of the 60 day »nteJrame lor <br />reliew of any application, and noted that the applicant needed to agree to tabling the <br />application or the Planning Commission would have to vote on it now, Brueggemaim <br />asked that the application be voted on and earned forward to the Counal. <br />Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to deny approval of Application #2099 as the <br />hardships do not justify the variances required for the subdivision as outUned m the memo. <br />Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.