Laserfiche WebLink
E <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />HELD APRIL 19, 1993 <br />ZONING FILE #1818 — CONT. <br />Mabusth noted total hardcover for the developed lot will be 16.6 %, <br />with excesses in the 0 -75' and 250 -500' zones. <br />Bellows suggested adjusting the lot line to eliminate the overage <br />of hardcover. <br />Gronberg noted that they are well under the maximum allowed in <br />zones nearer the lake, and suggested by adjusting the lot line, the <br />City would be encouraging the developer of the vacant parcel to <br />build closer to the lake because of the reduced area in the 250- <br />500' zone. <br />Bellows stated it would still be a 2 acre buildable lot. <br />Gronberg indicated it appears they are being penalized for building <br />the existing house further from the lake. <br />Lund stated they are trying to keep a balance between the two lots <br />• and to move the lot line to accommodate hardcover would be <br />disruptive. <br />Gabriel Jabbour suggested they consider the average lakeshore <br />setback with respect to the properties. <br />Johnson inquired about the history of the paved ramp to the lake. <br />Lund stated it was originally installed for private access to the <br />lake. He indicated the vacant lot has steeper terrain to the lake <br />and expressed concern about access. <br />Mabusth referred to the 20' wide sewer easement within the <br />undeveloped lot which serves no purpose and suggested the vacation <br />of such. <br />Lund questioned whether the pad for the antenna located within the <br />kennel structure could remain. <br />Mabusth stated she would like to inspect the kennel area, and said <br />it would have to be made clear to a future owner that it could not <br />be used for an antenna structure without City approval. <br />Johnson felt the ramp to the lake should be removed as it adds <br />water and contaminants to the lake and is located within the 0- <br />75' zone. <br />• Gronberg felt they would be creating an additional erosion problem <br />if the ramp were removed as slopes in this area are 12 -15 %. <br />3 <br />