Laserfiche WebLink
Jure 1«, 1993 <br />iP*<5« 4 <br />str««t through tho 50-foot building setback area. In th« Piqgo <br />cas9, th« 20-foot drivouay parcol la "atralght.* Tho only thing <br />that ia curved ia the l2-foot pavad portion of tha drivavay <br />within tha 20-foot straight drivavay itself. Tha reason for <br />stating that tha driveway may not ba "curved** in Resolution 2452, <br />referring to tha 20-foot atrip for tha driveway, is that an owner <br />could run a very long driveway soc€*what parallel to Sugarvooda <br />Drive thus conauaing a great quantity of land in the 50-foot <br />setback tone when what Orono intended in Resolution 2452 is that <br />the 20-foot pervitted driveway access be in a straight line froa <br />the street to the house so that the 50-foot restricted tone would <br />not be consuMd by the 20-foot wide driveway. <br />The reasons for pemitting the small amount of fill as a <br />matter of interpretation or variance ore that an unnatural <br />condition, namely, the fence line which was allowed to go to seed <br />so that sucker trees came into existence and blocked drainage <br />exists. This is through no-fault of the Pigge*s. The topography <br />of the land, the placement of the houses, the provision for the <br />periseter drainage and utility easement around tho lots <br />substantiates that in limited circumstances Orono understood that <br />slight variations in existing drainage patterns night be <br />necessary to carry out proper drainage for residential lots. We <br />submit that this is such a circumstance and that the small amount <br />of fill be permitted to improve the dtainage situation.