06-08-1998 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 26, 1998 (#11) #2365 Christine Valerius, 3750 Bayside Road - Sketch Plan - continued Gaffron added that there would be park dedication fees and sewer connection fees totaling approximately $20,000. Gaffron confirmed that the entire property is within the MUSA boundary. Christine Valerius distributed a handout stating her position and a letter supporting the subdivision signed by the neighbors. She compared her proposed subdivision to that of Mr. Evans on Landmark Drive noting that he was only granted one sewer unit; both her lots have more dry buildable than his; he had one lakeshore lot and so does she; access is off Bayside Road for both subdivisions; standards of the LR-1A zoning district are met; and she had twice as large a buildable envelope as Evans. She referred to the 15’ width variance stating that the existing driveway was the reason for the configuration. She could redesign the lot lines so that only a 1* variance would be required, but it is aesthetically more pleasing to leave the driveway as it exists. She asked Council to declare the property as sewered and grant a variance for lot width. She expressed her concern that Council was changing the ordinance at the same time as her application. Jabbour commented that the applicant was proceeding with the thought that Council was against her proposal. He explained that the consideration to eliminate wetland credits was a result of the recent Carpenter subdivision. The City does not want to provide a vehicle to allow greater density in the two acre zones. The City was not aware that her application was coming before Council. Gaffron confirmed that discussions about the applicant’s proposed subdivision had taken place prior to Council’s request to look at eliminating wetland credits. Kelley asked about the hardship for the width variance. Valerius responded that she wants to be able to sell the property and not have to change the driveway. Kelley stated he was not in favor of the subdivision and was not on the Council when the Landmark drive subdivision was approved. He did not feel the present Council was bound by decisions of past Councils. Jabbour stated that the ^plicant has the right to proceed with the subdivision under the existing code and she should be allowed to proceed and get the wetland credit. He added that proceeding with the application did not mean the subdivision would be approved. Peterson agreed that the subdivision request should be considered as an application prior to any code changes.