Laserfiche WebLink
/.. MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, DECEMBER 30, 1982 <br />ORDINANCE CON'T. separated by a road right of way identified by the <br />City of Orono as one building site, when in fact <br />when purchased by Mr. Ahern were two different <br />sites. For reasons I don't understar1d, under <br />your new ordinance, these were combined as one <br />building site even though they were divided by a <br />plated city street. It appeared the ordinance <br />intended to take all individual lots and cause <br />them to be buildable with exception of the ones you <br />tc1lk about. In response to that it would appear <br />the ordinance would cause that a number of lots <br />woulcl become only one lot. Roy sold the lots <br />before this ordinance went into effect. The new <br />copy of the ordinance shows you have made changes, <br />that changes the time of the owners of record for <br />these lots, and it is _that portion of the <br />ordinance(the owners of record) that I would like <br />to take this opportunity to object to. Can I ask <br />why it was done? <br />Mayor Van Nest then asked Mr. Olson for the facts <br />on these lots. Mr. Olson stated the facts of the <br />matter: are that he has two separate <br />holdings.The way the ordinance is written. One is <br />number !t58 and that lot is approxiruately . 32 <br />acres, completely separate from the other <br />holdings Mr. Ahern had. This was declared <br />buildable because it has a house on it. Second <br />part is properties that we have combined as #15 <br />slightly north of the first property(separated by <br />John Dean's property). Parcel ~15 combined on <br />both sides of the right of way totals 7. 1/2-acres. <br />Neither piece is 2 acres by itself, and so under <br />the current code,the 1974 code,it would be one <br />site, or would not be rebuildable. The cabin that <br />is on that property is completely deteriorated and <br />is in hazardous condition at this point. There <br />was a permit issued at one time to rebuild it but <br />was never acted on, it is not being used and is not <br />habitable at this time. Mr. Olson stated that he <br />has talked to ~1r. Ahern and Mr. Creer on this <br />matter in his office. <br />Mr. Roy Ahern stated that he had taken out the <br />building permit and had been doing some remodeling <br />in the cabin up until the time he sold the <br />pro per ty. <br />Mayor Van Nest asked Mr. Ahern what had he sold, <br />and Mr. Ahern stated that he sold because of the <br />ordinance being passed, and he was not going to be <br />able to use any of that property, he sold all of it. <br />He stated he sold all of the parcels except for ~58 <br />because I was not going to be able to use any of the <br />property the way I wanted to under the ordinance.