11-08-1993 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PUBLIC MEARLNG ON FLAG LOT ISSUES August 18, 1993 With the new Shoreland Ordinance, Hag lots that were never allowed because of a width Before passin» the Ordinance, Council looked at cul-de-sac lots or the lake and found ±em to nsuallv reauire variances. Thev questioned if it was fair to require lakeshore lots to meet the setback w?dth at the shoreline. 75' back, at the street setoack and at the road. The Shoreland Ordinance was adopted in February of 1992. Gaffron stated that Ilaa lots and cul-de-sacs could be defined differently. He provided several e.xamples of situations that CL,-renily e.xist in Orono (see E,xhibiB from * • 1993) One diagram illustrated that a driveway next to the house could be > oroolem. i.e. dus chM en piavinc, etc. Another example illustrated that under old t=S'‘ldtio,.s a vanance would be needed whife under the new Shoreland Regulations, no vanance would be requned. should not receive credit for '.ciciiiiining the average lot area. Rowlette questioned ho.v would make the lot differer from an oiitlot. Schroeder noted the end result would be die same its just how it is defmed. This leaves three different ways to '--.be the same situat.on. Plaiuiuig Commission will have to decide which is the best de.-i^.on to use. Nolan noted ther wUl be non-confonnance situations no maner which defini!,..'a is chosen. Schroeder thouehi flag lots are not necessarily bad. Rowlette agreed referring to examnles presented earlier. Smth asked if Gaffron had Diked with other ciues to see how they naTio “with“horclmc. Schroeder cored some negatives of lo« am the nve- aoins oast someone’s house and c back lot next to someone s front yard. Rowlette lell ih Muld L opportunities in writing an ordinance that would address some of these issues such as (he kind and area of screeiiing/buffering needed. Nolan thinks Ihcrc is a need to have flexibility in Ihe Code, espec,ally when is cons dered Gaffron responded tltat one way to add tins fle.xibdtty ,s to make a fUg lo a varia!Tc= every time. RowlL noted that in a recent Watertown Road apphcat.on there was a lot of discussion about positioning the road. In that case, the dnveway was an tu Mabusth asked if the -back from a driveway easemem is addressed at this time and if the setback for an existing house and j^d should be a front street setback rather than a side setback creating a larger ^ Nolan were concerned about how the setbacks would affect the property with the new house u/.infgd to assure sufficient butfering.