09-08-2014 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 8, 2014 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 of 25 (6. #14-3675 RYAN AND STACY ALNESS, XXX ELMWOOD AVENUE/PID 07-117-23-11-0027 – VARIANCES, Continued) Bremer asked how many Special Lot Combination Agreements the City currently has. Gaffron indicated Staff has identified less than a dozen, with the majority of them being on lots that are located directly across the road from each other. Gaffron stated typically they exist on Stubbs Bay and North Shore Drive. Mattick stated it might make sense to run through some of the practical difficulty criteria outlined in Staff’s report. Printup asked if the average lakeshore setback line cuts through the middle of the property whether that creates a practical difficulty. Mattick stated it can since it basically leaves the lot unbuildable and does not leave much of a building pad. Mattick stated when you talk about practical difficulty that Staff’s memo lays out the 12 criteria. Mattick stated one of the findings of the City Council could be that the applicants are proposing to put it to a residential use, which is what the Comprehensive Plan guides it for. Mattick noted the size and scope of the project does not require any variances from the setbacks with the exception of the average lakeshore setback. McMillan stated the average lakeshore setback variance is a unique situation given the Special Lot Combination Agreement and is not something that the applicants created. Mattick stated one of the criteria is whether the situation is unique and not created by the applicants. The applicants purchased the land knowing that the Special Lot Combination Agreement was in force but that they did not create the lakeshore lot originally. Mattick stated what the average lakeshore setback line would be is not necessarily something a property owner would know coming into that situation. Mattick stated in his opinion this is a unique situation and was not something created by the Alnesses. Bremer stated she agrees with Points 1 and 2. As it relates to Point No. 3, given the fact the character of the locality is a residential area, that point also is not an issue. Bremer stated in her view No. 4 is also not in play here. Mattick stated there has been no demonstration that this is due to an economic consideration. The applicants are not asking to have a house bigger than what they are allowed and they are not trying to avoid one of the City’s requirements. Mattick stated the applicants’ proposal is code compliant except for the average lakeshore setback. Bremer stated Point N. 5 also does not apply. Bremer stated Point No. 6 is one of those situations that the City has struggled with and it is not a surprise to anyone that the City is still going through that internal struggle. Bremer noted the Special Lot Combination Agreement was in place for a number of years before the current Council was aware of it and that these types of issues tend to bubble up after a few years.