Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />November 10, 2014 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />  Page 13 of 31  <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(5. #14-3690 FRED JOHNSON (C/D PURCHASER), PATRICIA PFEFFER (SELLER), 1565 <br />ORCHARD BEACH PLACE – VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, Continued) <br /> <br />Haugan indicated he is aware of that and that there were several false assumptions that were made in <br />1978. Haugan indicated consideration was based on the incorrect size of the lot and the fact that there <br />was not a sewer stub to the property, which was also incorrect. Haugan stated in his view that resolution <br />is not precedent setting and does not bind this Council. <br /> <br />McMillan noted the sewer is discussed in the resolution and that it says if it has ever been assessed a <br />sewer unit charge to enable a house to be constructed on the property. The resolution also says the <br />property has been evaluated for tax purposes in the past on a reduced amount to reflect the fact that this is <br />a substandard lot upon which no house may be constructed. McMillan noted Item No. 5 says that this lot <br />has historically been subject to flooding and is a natural drainage way to the watershed. <br /> <br />McMillan stated a lot of that still pertains today. McMillan stated there was some pretty firm <br />documentation done back in 1978, which is why this property was never assessed as a buildable vacant <br />lot. <br /> <br />Haugan noted this property was assessed at $150,000 a while ago and that his argument would be that if <br />you cannot build anything on it, it is essentially worth nothing and the value should be zero since there is <br />no other use other than putting a house there. <br /> <br />McMillan stated it is a recreational lakeshore lot that can be used for swimming and that sort of thing. <br />McMillan stated she understands how that would make the lot more valuable. <br /> <br />Haugan stated he would be the first to concede that if a house is constructed on the property, it would be <br />worth more than $71,000. Haugan stated his request would be that the Council direct Staff to re-evaluate <br />whether it would be possible to grant the rear setback variance and the street variance, which would <br />amount to 12 to 16 feet going backwards and 10 feet going sideways. Haugan stated that would give <br />them a property to build on that would be in character with the rest of the neighborhood. Haugan stated <br />in their view the property can be properly drained and that they will not be taking down any significant <br />trees. <br /> <br />McMillan stated she looks at the lot as being very marginal for a house, and if a house is constructed, <br />there would have to be substantial grading and a number of variances granted. McMillan stated as <br />properties around the lake become scarcer, people requesting permission to construct on marginal lots <br />makes it difficult for the Council. McMillan stated she understands the applicants’ position but that <br />anytime someone builds on a marginal lot, it will have problems and needs to be addressed very <br />thoroughly. <br /> <br />Haugan noted many of the properties listed in Exhibit D are no larger than this lot and that hardcover <br />would not be an issue. <br /> <br />McMillan noted many of the lots are deeper than this lot, which allows the house to sit further back. <br />McMillan stated the City also did change its hardcover regulations a few years ago, which changed the <br />amount of allowable hardcover on this property and eliminated the need for a variance, but that they still <br />have the same problems with drainage and the need to do excessive grading to make it buildable.