Laserfiche WebLink
� I ' � ' <br /> - � �1V' ' <br /> O o <br /> �g �,- CITY o� 4RON0 <br /> � �,�'�� � � <br /> ti <br /> ,� G RESOLUTION OF THE C(TY COUNCIL <br /> L�kESfI�4��' N0. � .ri r :; . <br /> 1. The properties are located within the LR-1B, One Fa�ilily Lakeshore <br /> Residential Zoiung District requiriilg a miiumum of 140' in lot width and <br /> 1.0 acres of contiguous diy buildable la.nd within each newly created lot. <br /> 2. The proposed lot line rearrangeinent and st�eet vacation encompasses <br /> three residential lots and a part of vacated Lake Street, containing a total <br /> of 0.�8 acres of land. <br /> 3. Upon completion of the lot luie rearrangement, 4731 North Shore Drive <br /> will contain approximately 11,553 s.£ (0.26 acres) and 60' in defined � <br /> width wluch will continue to be nonconformin; with respect to lot area <br /> and lot width within the LR-1B, One Family Lalceshore Residential <br /> Zoning Dish-ict. <br /> 4. Upon completion of the lot line reaiYangement, 4725 North Shore Drive <br /> will contain appro�;imately 13,927 s.f. (0.32 acres) and 75' in defined <br /> width which will continue to be nonconformin� with respect to lot area <br /> and lot width withiil the LR-1B, One Family Lalceshore Residential <br /> Zoning District. <br /> 5. But for tlze availability of all three parcels for combinatioi�/division at the <br /> sa�ne time, it is probable that atteinpts would be made to redevelop each of <br /> the three parcels individually, or at least i:o redevelop the westerly parcel <br /> separately froin the easterly tvro parcels, resttlting in the need for greater <br /> variances and less flexibility of site design due to the narrow, steep nature <br /> of the lots. The opportunity to require a shared driveway access would <br /> also be lost. Additionally, Uecause two of the parcels have been assessed <br /> for and provided wit11 nlunicipal sewer, and have been developed with <br /> single family residences for many years, it is unlikely that tlle City would <br /> deny variances for a total of two homes on the three parcels. The <br /> proposed combination/subdivision results in two lots t11at can Ue <br /> developed more efficiently thaii if such a re-arranQement was not <br /> occuiYiii�. " <br /> 6. The City Council finds that the vacation of a portioiz of Lalce Street as <br /> proposed is ii� lceepin�with the public interest and not in conflict with the <br /> provisions of t11e Orono Community ManaQement Plan in consideration of <br /> the followiii? findin�s <br /> PaQe 3 of 9 <br />