Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMTvUSSION <br />MEETING HELD ON MARCH 16. 1998 <br />i 1 <br />SCHEDULED PUBUC HEARINGS: SUBDIVISIONS <br />(#5) KEVIN AND LISA OLSEN/JIM AND JUNE TOUVE, 4196 NORTH SHORE <br />DRIVE - CLASS I SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - 7:49- <br />8:45 P.M. <br />The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. <br />The Applicants were present. <br />Gafiron reported that the request is for a metes and bounds simple subdivision to separate <br />a platted lot that was legally combined in the past. Lots 55, 56, and 57 were legally <br />combined. Mr. Touve sold lots 55 and 56 to the Olsens without lot 57. They were <br />advised that this constituted an illegal subdivision and would require a formal subdivision <br />with the City, but the City staff would not recommend approval due to the sub-standard <br />lot situation and given history of ownership of the property. Gafffon noted there are <br />wetlands located on lots 57-61. <br />Gaffi-on said he did not recommend separating lot 57 from lots 55 and 56 due to the lot <br />sizes and "lot of record" status. The zoning is one acre. Lots 55-57 have a total acreage <br />of .81 and meet the 80% requirement for buildability. Any reduction would make the size <br />more substandard and give Touve increased potential for building within the remaining <br />lots. Gaffi-on noted that Touve has not made any application to date regarding future <br />building and that would be a separate application. <br />Gaffron reviewed the issues for consideration as noted on page 2 of the memo. Lots 58- <br />61 when combined would be under the one acre requirement, and contain only .48 acre of <br />dry buildable, which would not meet the standard. A driveway would also have to cross <br />over the wetlands. Gaffron indicated that the request to add Lot 57 to 58-61 would result <br />in making a substandard group of three lots into a smaller group requiring variances. He <br />feels consideration also has to be given to lots 58-61 if combined on their own merit. The <br />deeds were created over 10 years ago, and the Olsen's have paid taxes on the 3 lots <br />without having a deed to all three lots. Olsen ’s now have the property up for sale, and <br />Gaffron believes the intent is only to sell the two lots. This needs to be resolved. If the <br />lots are not separated, lot 57 would have to be sold with the other two lots. Gaffron said <br />neither City or County records document the history- behind the combination, and he <br />recommends denial of the application.