Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, November 20, 2000 <br /> (#2634/2635 G & G HOLDING COMPANY, Continued) <br /> and lot area for each of the lots. Weinberger stated due to the lot line rearrangement,the front <br /> property lines would change and become narrower. <br /> Weinberger stated Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the request for the <br /> vacation of the alley and lot line rearrangement prior to the variance part of the application being <br /> heard. Staff is recommending approval of the lot line rearrangement and vacation of the alley. <br /> Hurr stated she has no additional comments to Staff's report but would be happy to answer any <br /> questions the Planning Commission may have. <br /> Bill Bockmann, 1130 Loma Linda Avenue, inquired whether the service road would stay in its <br /> current location. <br /> Weinberger stated that would remain as the driveway access to the property. Weinberger stated <br /> the vacation of the alley and lot line rearrangement allows for the two lots to become larger in <br /> size and to reduce the need for setbacks. <br /> Jeff Johnson, 1145 Loma Linda Avenue, stated he did provide a letter to the City regarding this <br /> application. <br /> Weinberger stated he does have the letter in the file. Weinberger stated the letter indicates he <br /> is against the variance to allow lot lines or building size or hardcover which would restrict his <br /> • view of the lake. In addition,the property owners should have been aware of the size of the lots <br /> and building requirements prior to purchase and should not pose a hardship on the adjoining <br /> property. <br /> Johnson stated he was told there would be no encroachment into the lot line. <br /> Weinberger stated as proposed, if the alley is vacated and a portion of the service road becomes <br /> part of Parcel A,the defined front property line would be along Loma Linda, which would <br /> require a 30 foot setback to the south property line. Weinberger stated the closest any structure <br /> could be built to the property line would be 30 feet,with the old requirement being 35 feet from <br /> the edge of the service road. <br /> Hurr commented they are not constructing any building on Parcel B. Hurr stated they are not <br /> proposing any variances to the 30 foot setback at this time. Hun noted that trees could be <br /> planted which would in essence block his view as much as a building would. <br /> Nygard inquired how the 15 percent structural coverage rule applies to this small lot. <br /> Weinberger stated 15 percent of the lot would allow a footprint of 2,100 square feet, which could <br /> be affected by any existing hardcover on the property. Weinberger stated they will not know <br /> what is being proposed until they request a building permit. <br /> Hawn commented it is possible in her view that a house could potentially impact his view <br /> even though his lot is located downhill. Hawn noted the height of the building could not exceed <br /> 30 feet. <br /> PAGE 13 <br />