My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-16-1996 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1996
>
01-16-1996 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/7/2023 2:51:34 PM
Creation date
9/7/2023 2:43:21 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
411
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 <br />(#18 - #2070 L E. Brueggeman Companies - Continued) <br />Gaflfron questioned whether the driveway across the top portion of the property was <br />included in the calculations. Brueggeman said the parcel contained 49.680 s.f. He <br />eliminated the area within the 75'zone, netting 28,000. 25% of that figure equ s <br />s.f and took off the driveway for a net amount of 4500 s.f <br />Peterson questioned the ability of the property to have two homes on one lot. <br />Brueggeman said this is consistent with . 'it homes in the neighborhood at this time which <br />average .7 to .8 acres with the largest at l-J/2 acres. These two lots would be 1.0 acre <br />and .9 acre in size. <br />Rowlene said she saw this application as an opportunity to gain a 2-acre lot m the ^.-acre <br />zoning district adding that as a single building site, it would be beautiful, ^e applicant s <br />concern is with property value and overbuilding for the homes in the neighborhood. <br />Peterson said he liked the proposal but questioned whether it should be two lots when it is <br />one to begin with. Lindquist noted that other lots built on were I acre in size. <br />Hawn asked if the adjacent homes in the neighborhood were conneaed to sewer. Gaflfron <br />said sewer was available to ail of the homes but not necessarily connected. <br />Hawn asked if any other lots were combined in the neighborhood. There was one other <br />lakeshore lot that'was combined and is a 100' lot. The rest of the lakeshore lots were <br />individual lots. <br />Brueggeman said this was an unusual case with 4 buildings on 3 lots adding that the <br />proposal would clean up the site. Peterson commented that the cabins have been directed <br />to be removed anyways regardless of the result of this proposal. <br />Gaffron noted that the property has existed as a non-conforming use. When the sewer <br />came available to the property, the non-confomiity was brought to a head. Maeser is <br />looking at the options av^able. Gaflfiāon added that the deadline of June 1995 for <br />connecting the house to sewer has yet to be dealt with. <br />Brue,ggeman said the rights of Maeser need to be considered by the Commission and <br />Council, which he felt has not been done. It is his desire to solve the problems. <br />Gaffi-on said the property is 3 separate tax parcels. In the sewered zone, it is required to <br />look at each separately as to their buUdability. The current standards do not allow these <br />lots to be buildable. <br />1 <br />1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.