Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Monday, March 16, 2020 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />ROLL CALL <br /> <br />The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: <br />Chair Jon Ressler (arrived at 6:06 p.m.) Vice-Chair Bob Erickson, Commissioners Chris Bollis, Matt <br />Gettman, Dennis Libby, and Mark Doepke, Alternate. Representing Staff were Community Development <br />Director Jeremy Barnhart, City Planners Melanie Curtis and Laura Oakden. <br /> <br /> <br />4. LA20-000016 PAUL VOGSTROM, 2710 PENCE LANE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - <br />7:22 P.M. - 7:39 P.M. <br /> <br />Paul Vogstrom, o/b/o the Property Owner, and Eric Vogstrom, Property Owner, were present. <br /> <br />Staff presented a summary of packet information. She noted Staff recommends approval conditioned <br />upon the property owners’ agreement to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property addressing the <br />plumbing and the status as an oversized accessory building, providing that the accessory building will not <br />be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the City or if allowed by this Code. 2. <br />Used as a dwelling unless a guest house Conditional Use Permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or <br />otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. 4. Regarding future subdivision of the <br />property: a. No future subdivision will be approved that places the oversized accessory building within a <br />lot that has no principal building; b. If the property is subdivided, the oversized accessory building and <br />principal building will be located together within a lot that meets the minimum lot area requirement for <br />the given size of the oversized accessory building; c. In subdivision approval, the setback required for the <br />oversized accessory building shall remain. <br /> <br />Doepke referenced a letter which indicates, “it would be both irresponsible and naïve to consider issuing <br />this permit based on the repeated violations on record,” and asked what the violations were. <br /> <br />Oakden stated she believed the lot owner was still working on some shoreline restoration. <br /> <br />Ressler pointed out that the Commission has approved such applications in the past. <br /> <br />Oakden agreed and said they are requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a shower. <br />Ressler noted there is nothing that says the Commission cannot approve the application. <br /> <br />Oakden said he was correct, if the Commission sees that the conditions are being met. <br /> <br />Ressler clarified that it is not approving or endorsing the space for a rental of any kind. <br /> <br />Oakden stated he was correct; it is not allowed to be rented or leased. That is a listed requirement which is <br />recorded when filling out this CUP. <br /> <br />Ressler stated the Commission is being asked to approve a shower and that everything else is in order. <br /> <br />Oakden indicated the applicant does not have a building permit for the structure, but the actual proposed <br />detached garage does meet City Code requirements. The CUP is only for the shower.