Laserfiche WebLink
� . , ' . <br /> � O� � <br /> O O <br /> • � S CITY of URONO <br /> � - ; . � <br /> ti <br /> ti <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> ��`9kESII�4�G NO. � �. � � <br /> 4. The plat of "Senn Orono Addition" was approved two years before adoption of <br /> Orono's Shoreland Ordinance and one year prior to enactment of the WCA. <br /> Neither lot has ever been built on, and the driveway approved in 1990 was <br /> likewise never constructed. Applicants are proposing a complete lot line <br /> rearrangement and re-plat of the property to allow relocation of the proposed <br /> driveway, which today would not be approved in its 1990 configuration due to <br /> Shoreland restrictions, and to allow for slight revisions in potential house <br /> locations. The new plat is subject to `front lot/back lot' area and setback <br /> standards which were also not in effect in 1990. � <br /> 5. The proposed re-plat consists of two residential lots each meeting the minimum <br /> 2.0 acres contiguous dry buildable lot area requirement of the RR-1B Zoning <br /> District. Proposed Lot 2 meets the 200' width requirement. Proposed Lot 1 <br />. requires a variance to the minimum 200' lot width requirement as measured at <br /> the rear of the defined front yard. The basis for the width variance is as follows: <br /> • A primary issue for development of Lot 1 is access. The proposed access along <br /> the easterly boundary of Lot 2 has impacts on the shape and development <br /> potential of Lot 2. The current proposal correctly assumes that variances would <br /> not be granted to allow the driveway to parallel the creek within the required 75' <br /> hardcover/grading setback from the creek bank. Assuming that a wetland/creek <br /> crossing within Lot 1 would�ultimately be approved, then the proposed 30' <br /> ' corridor along the east boundary of Lot 2 and skirting the hillside in the south <br /> half of Lot 1, is a reasonable driveway location because it avoids the 75' creek <br /> protection zone except at the point of actual creek crossing. However, in order <br /> for the driveway to skirt the hill and not encroach into Lot 2, Outlot A is <br /> shortened and Lot 1 extends southward past the base of the hill. This is the <br /> hardship that supports the lot width variance for Lot 1. <br /> 6. The proposed re-plat meets the "front lot/back loY' standards of the Zoning Code <br /> with regards to lot areas and with regards to placement of a residence structure <br /> on proposed Lot 1 meeting the more restrictive `back lot' setback requirements. <br /> 7. Each lot will be served by private wells and individual onsite sewage treatment <br /> systems. Septic system site evaluation and design information has been <br /> submitted confirming that each lot contains suitable primary and alternate <br /> drainfield sites to serve the proposed residences. The elevation of the sites in Lot <br /> 1 is generally at least 1.5' or more above the 100 year flood elevation, and 3.5' <br /> aabove the delineated wetland elevation. <br /> Page 2 of 9 <br />