My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-24-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting
Orono
>
City Council
>
1988
>
10-24-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/12/2026 10:57:01 AM
Creation date
9/30/2025 9:11:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Administration
Admin Doc Type
Agenda Packet City Council
Section
City Council
Subject
regular meeting
Document Date
10/24/1988
Retention Effective Date
9/30/2025
Retention
Permanent After File Date
Protection
Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
556
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 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBEP 3, 1988 <br />ZONING FILE #1310-BISINGER CONTINUED <br />well as the school bus schedules and routes and rush hour. <br />Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. <br />#1328 HOWARD B. JOHNSON <br />1635 i 1675 CONCORDIA STREET <br />SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LIME REARRANGEMENT -CLASS I <br />SECOND REVIEW <br />The applicant was present, as was the new owner of 1635 <br />Concordia Street, Mr. David Eiss. <br />Chairman Kelley read a letter that had been sent by Mr. <br />Thomas Kelly, an Attorney for Mrs. Trainor. The letter indicated <br />that Mrs. Trainor supported the proposed subdivision applied for <br />by Mr. Johnson. Kelley stated that the main issue now involved <br />with this application was whether the side setback would be 5' or <br />10'. <br />Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron <br />reiterated Mr. Kelley's statement regarding a 5' or 10' setback. <br />He reminded the Planning Commission that the current zoning for <br />this property was LR-1C, half acre district, and that the <br />standard side setback was 10'. The 5' that the applicant is <br />proposing improves the current situation. Kelley surmised that <br />this lot line rearrangement was necessary for Mr. Eiss to obtain <br />title insurance. Planning Commission member Hanson inquired as <br />to how much acreage wes available. Gaffron responded that Tract <br />A was approximately 170,500 s.f., which would be approximately 4 <br />acres. <br />Mr. Eiss stated that he did not understand how the City <br />could "reward" Mrs. Trainor for encroaching on Mr. Johnson's <br />property by giving her an additional 5'. Counci lmember Johnson <br />stated that the City was not giving a reward, it was merely <br />trying to conform to the City's standards. The applicant asked <br />why Mrs. Trainor could not be asked to give up 10' of her house. <br />Hanson replied that the Planning Commission tried 'o look upon <br />all applications with common. sense. Mr. Johnson stated that he <br />was trying to be neighborly by giving Mrs. Trainor 5', but she <br />was to pay for the survey and attorney's fees. Mrs. Trainor has <br />not paid these fees and Mr. Johnson Suggested that she therefore, <br />pay for the additional 5' of land. Hanson stated that those <br />issues were beyond the control of the Planning Commission. <br />Kelley informed Mr. Johnson that going to Court would be another <br />recourse. <br />Plannir• Commission member Hanson stated that he would like <br />to see the setback standard upheld. Mr. Johnson asked what <br />effect the 1V' requirement would have should Mr. Eiss want to <br />subdivide that lot. Hanson stated that he could not address that <br />issue without further information being provided. Planning <br />Commission member Cohen stated that someone applied to the City <br />to have this matter heard by the Planning Commission. He <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.