Laserfiche WebLink
m <br />uestion fit into <br />f 1/2 mile from <br />13 are 1.25 to 2 <br />5 acre. (These <br />itegorized in one <br />is contemplated <br />uer was excluded <br />lo houses are on <br />t in Orono's two <br />listing lots are <br />ty and lot sizes <br />[It without City <br />1 not help that <br />second building <br />ct turned down a <br />ill application <br />i <br />-* p”. <br />V <br />J <br />ssm <br />'arVl-.v- <br />f.-' <br />>i <br />m <br />.1*^ <br />‘P-: <br />6A. <br />vA-a <br />To: <br />l^Qlis <br />Planning CoimissiOh Members i^/Sfw ^ <br />5^-ff “07Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator <br />Date: <br />Subjects <br />February 6» 1986 <br />#990 Ward Ferrell 3405*3411-3415 Watertown Road <br />Variances * Update to Memo of November 13# 1985 <br />l^st of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A - Memo of 11/13/85 With Exhibits <br />Exhibit B - Survey of Property With Existing House <br />Exhibit C - Soils Report# Site Plan For Existing House <br />Exhibit D - Planning Commission Minutes 11/18/85 <br />Mr. Ferrell has now submitted the additional survey and <br />soils report to show an alternate drainfield site for the <br />existing house. Given no future encroachments# there is adequate <br />area on the lot wifti the existing house to replace the septic <br />system with a fully conforming system. <br />Please review the memo of 11/13/85. As noted in that memo <br />and considering the additional information submitted# it appears <br />technically possible to place a house, garage# driveway# well# <br />and primary and alternate septic systems on each of the lots. <br />The possiMe house location would be somewhat limited by the <br />drainfield sites. There would be potential conflicts if a <br />situation occurred where an extremely large house# pool# tennis <br />court# etc. were proposed. The properties lend themselves to <br />relatively low levels of development. <br />Finally# from a zoning code standpoint# even if only one new <br />building site is granted# this is precedent setting. In the <br />past# Council and Planning Commission have generally held the <br />line in similar unsewered common ovmership situations. Approval <br />of 1 or 2 new building sites might have long-term impact on <br />Orono's effectiveness in avoiding sewer. Weigh this against the <br />applicant's real and preceived rights as a property owner and the <br />history of zoning code changes over the years. Are there <br />sufficient justifications to grant a variance? <br />■H;. ;• <br />Council origl <br />appeal# at whi <br />1 additional <br />building sites <br />D# the compos] <br />is requesting <br />adjacent to hi <br />the current 2- <br />To briefly re^ <br />this property: <br />1950 Zon; <br />separate <br />1958 - Fe <br />a second 1 <br />told by H <br />require a <br />residence <br />1959 - Fe <br />of Ordina <br />width of <br />allowed C <br />in singl'