Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Tuesday, February 16, 2021 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />3. LA21-000004 STONEWOOD LLC, 1150 PINE VIEW DRIVE, CONDITIONAL USE <br />PERMIT (STAFF: MELANIE CURTIS) <br />John Daly with Stonewood LLC, Applicant, was present. <br />Staff presented a summary packet of information. Curtis said the Applicant is proposing to install a full <br />bathroom within a proposed 884 square foot pool -house building. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is <br />required due to the proposed shower within an accessory building. Additionally, if the survey looked a <br />little odd, there is an administrative boundary line adjustment in process, so the property is changing <br />shape but it does not affect the application before the Planning Commission. Curtis noted they are adding <br />a portion of the neighboring property to their own. Staff has not received any public comments on the <br />CUP request; Staff is recommending approval conditioned upon the property owners' agreement to the <br />filing of a restrictive covenant in the title of the property which addresses the plumbing and the use <br />providing that the pool house will not be used for home occupation, used as a dwelling, rented, leased, or <br />otherwise used as a dwelling under any circumstances. <br />Ressler noted this seems very similar to many, many others that the Planning Commission has approved <br />and really seems to be pulled in front of them because of the additional toilet and shower. <br />Curtis clarified it is because of the shower. <br />Ressler noted there is nothing exotic that he is not catching. <br />Curtis replied no, it is very straightforward. <br />John Daly with Stonewood LLC, 153 East Lake Street, said this is pretty procedural and the structure <br />being built is a pool house and that is the intent with the shower. <br />Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:30 p.m. <br />Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:30 p.m. <br />Kirchner believes it has been summarized well and is very similar to many others the Planning <br />Commission has approved. He does not see anything as an issue and the only reason it is before them is <br />because of the indoor plumbing in an accessory structure. Staff is recommending the standard restrictive <br />covenants. Beyond that he does not know there is much discussion to be had. <br />Ressler agrees. <br />Gettman asked regarding the Keller Road, is there the potential or concern that the road would be <br />extended in some way to have that accessory building tied in. <br />Curtis replied no, Keller Road is in Medina and there is no connection planned. <br />Ressler thinks it is laid out that it cannot be leased, the City already has covenants about short-term <br />leasing and all the bases seem to be covered. He asked if there was any opposition. <br />Page 6 of 38 <br />