My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-20-2024 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2024
>
02-20-2024 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2024 12:34:52 PM
Creation date
2/21/2024 3:37:40 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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 <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />January 17, 2023 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />Ressler said he'd like to answer the applicant's question on the hardcover. We don't want to have three <br />non -conforming lots if we're talking about the adjoining property. In terms of zoning right now are those <br />northern lots even technically also zoned commercial? <br />Oakden said they're zoned residential. LR 1 C one is a residential zone. <br />Ressler said if it was for the higher density, then they would still be creating a problem because they'd be <br />asking for one non -conforming lot. The whole idea would be, let's get the zoning corrected to the spirit of <br />the neighborhood and then create conforming lots. And by doing so, then you would be able to do that. <br />McCutcheon asked if we were to rezone the northern parcels as LR 1 B, does that help instead of having <br />lots of variances with this one to make it as is it? <br />Oakden said LR 1 B is a larger zoning district, one acre minimum. Right now, with the split the LR <br />1 C 1 is the half -acre lot minimum. With the split at the lagoon, the LR 1 C one meets the half -acre needed, <br />but then that leaves the southern lots not being an acre in size. So that's the creation of a non -conforming <br />lot on both applications. <br />Libby said he thought the discussion had been very healthy, especially with applicants in-house. I think <br />that bringing this back to us and talking is kind of what we're here for. We can't always do a vote. But we <br />can always give our input. So I feel gratified that we had this time to spend. <br />McCutcheon said he felt if they're going to change something, let's do it the best fit that checks, the most <br />boxes that we've talked about here, whether it's the access to Shoreline Drive, the buildable areas, <br />wetland, easements, all these sorts of things that we talked about. I guess we'll end the discussion there. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.