Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,March 16,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Ressler pointed out that the Commission has approved such applications in the past. <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 /> Oakden said he was correct, if the Commission sees that the conditions are being met. <br /> Ressler clarified that it is not approving or endorsing the space for a rental of any kind. <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 /> Ressler stated the Commission is being asked to approve a shower and that everything else is in order. <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. <br /> Mr.Paul Vogstrom, 1151 North Shore, said if there is a concern about the violations,he would love to <br /> have the Commission dig into it and understand because,to his knowledge,there is only some <br /> discrepancy on where the riprap has been placed.He stated his brother,Eric,the owner,has talked to the <br /> neighbors about screening. They would have preferred to not have the detached garage added on to the <br /> structure. They had many meetings discussing the average shoreline setbacks and had to move the house <br /> so far away from the lake that it made the side yard setbacks quite a bit smaller.They were hoping to have <br /> a few more stalls in the garage; it could have been deeper to accommodate the different storage unit <br /> requirements that are needed for the detached garage.What they have proposed is in the code. It will not <br /> be used for rental;people will not be living there;it will be used by non-paying people and family <br /> members. <br /> Ressler asked Staff what the ramifications are if the usage is not in compliance with the CUP. <br /> Oakden stated it would be a violation of the CUP,which is something the Council could take action on. <br /> Ressler asked if that would be a revocation. <br /> Oakden said the Council grants a CUP and it stays with the property. If there are concerns that it is not <br /> meeting the CUP standards,the Council can revisit the CUP at any time. <br /> Barnhart indicated the City Council would need to have a cause to do so. <br /> Ressler clarified it would need to be in violation of the conditions. <br /> Barnhart stated the City Council could revoke a CUP in the same way that they grant a CUP,which is <br /> through a public hearing,etc.What it would mean is, it would remove the ability for a shower but the <br /> structure can remain there. <br /> Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. <br /> Page 11 of 16 <br />