Laserfiche WebLink
d) Legally combined lots separated by a proposed new <br />division line are subject to the regulations of this <br />chapter if the resulting parcels do not meet the <br />requirements of the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. <br />The proposed subdivision falls under category "d" <br />above, being a total of 4 lots legally combined for tax <br />purposes with a proposal to separate the total of 4 <br />parcels into 2 total parcels by a proposed new division <br />line which does not follow any of the existing lot <br />lines. <br />18. When 2 municipal sewer units were assessed to the <br />property in 1970, that assessment anticipated the potential <br />possibility that variances might be granted for construction <br />of a second residence on the property. However, assessment <br />of the second sewer unit did not, in and of itself, grant <br />the property owner a future right to build a second <br />residence on the property. <br />19. Denial of the requested variances, and therefore denial <br />of the subdivision application, does not constitute a having <br />of property or loss of substantial value becau?:? rV* <br />property has always been one residential building siiie. H <br />of which has served as lot area, yard and open space fo\\ <br />residence which continues to occupy said property. the <br />applicant of his own free will combined the four pre~ <br />existing tax parcels into one tax parcel defining the <br />property as one property containing one residence in 1976, <br />and has enjoyed its benefits as a fully conforming <br />residential lot within the LR-IB zoning district since that <br />time, and can continue to enjoy the same benefits and value <br />without the requested subdivision. <br />HOW, THBRBFORB, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council <br />of the City of Orono hereby denies Kevin and Earl Norwood's <br />requested subdivision of the property and further denies any and <br />all variances from Zoning Code performance standards, which <br />variances would have been required in order to approve the said <br />subdivision, based upon one or more of the findings of fact <br />concerning this property noted above. <br />Page 7 of 8