PC Minutes 1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 16, 1994 ( #4) 1911 ERNEST LEMMERMAN, 4620 TONKAVIEW LANE - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Chair Schroeder noted that the Certificate of Mailing and the Affidavit of Publication were on file with the City. Mabusth reviewed the staff report and outlined the area that was buildable. Ernest Lemmerman was present. Chair Schroeder noted this was a public hearing continued from a pervious meeting. Ken Hickey stated he owned the lot immediately adjacent to that of the applicant, and stated he had sent a letter to the Planning Commission. He stated he was opposed to building on this lot because it is substandard, and it will cause erosion in the area. He believed the buildable area was too close to his house. Rowlette inquired about the average lot sizes in the area and Mabusth responded that they are all half -acre 1 plus acres in this area, and she noted that the subject lot is .78 acres in area. Lemmerman commented that he had purchased the land so that his homestead lot would be larger and more usable. Mabusth noted that the property had sewer available and would have been issued a building permit if the lot contained .8 acres or 80% of required area. Discussion ensued regarding the lot line rearrangement and the top of bluff definition as it would apply to the subject property. • Lindquist stated that he had problems with the application because the proposed lot area was under half an acre and the potential for further variances being requested in the future because of the size of the building envelope. Mabusth reviewed the building envelope location that complied with Orono standards. Lindquist questioned whether the lot was buildable given it's size. Schroeder stated that the Planning Commission had approved the lot line rearrangement with the proposed areas and dimensions and he felt that they could not take the position that the lots were now too small. Nolan commented that since they had approved the lots, then needed to make it the best it can be given the parameters they have available. He preferred to give the applicant a reasonable building envelope and see something built that was feasible. Hickey stated he felt that the lot should not be built on and while he has had an opportunity to purchase the property he felt it was too expensive. Chair Schroeder stated that the Planning Commission could approve the request with a note in the file that the Planning Commission would look at changing the building envelope through review when plans were formally submitted. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Berg, to recommend approval of #1911 lot area variance as proposed and a building envelope as defined by the required setbacks for Ernest Lemmerman at 4620 Tonkaview Lane, with the requirement that the sketch of • the defined building envelope be included as part of the resolution granting approval of the area variance in order to alert a future owner of the unique sloped building envelope. Ayes 5, nays 1. Lindquist stated he felt the lot area was too small to contain 2