07-25-2022 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 11, 2022 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 6 Crosby noted it is not a practical difficulty. If the Applicant can create two conforming lots it would be okay. Johnson noted another way to get more use out of the land is to put in a guest house. He checked with Ms. Curtis on whether that is an option. Ms. Curtis replied that is true. Mayor Walsh stated the Review Committee will be looking at proposed ordinance and Code changes to the guest houses. Right now one cannot use a guest house for a dwelling but they will be looking at certain zoning districts or certain amount of land one may be able to allow a dwelling for family members. He noted they do not want people renting them out but if people have elderly parents or young people coming home from college it might make sense. 15. LA22-000029 – JOHN PETERSON, 2880 FOX STREET, VARIANCE John Peterson, Applicant, was present. Ms. Curtis gave a summary presentation on the item, noting this application is regarding a height variance for an accessory building on a 3+ acre property. City Code limits maximum height for all buildings at 30 feet and further stipulates that accessory buildings cannot exceed the height of the home on the property. Mr. Peterson applied for a building permit to construct a pole building on his 3.17 acre property with a proposed peak height of approximately 17 feet (defined height is 15 feet). The existing home is a one- story walkout rambler with a peak height of approximately 16 feet (defined height is estimated to be 12 feet). A permit could not be issued and the Applicant has requested a height variance. Ms. Curtis said although the pole building will be well below the permitted 30 foot defined height limit and will be located behind the home on grade approximately 10 feet lower than the grade of the home, its height is still limited by the height of the home itself. According to the owner, reducing its height to conform significantly reduces its functionality for the planned use. In June the Planning Commission held a public hearing and speculated about the intent for the additional accessory building height limitation. They suggested the City Council consider a text amendment regarding this provision and voted 6 to 0 to deny the motion due to lack of practical difficulty. Staff recommends denial of the variance request. However, Staff concurs with the Planning Commission’s recommendation that Council consider initiating a text amendment process to remove or modify this restriction from this zoning district. Mr. Peterson showed photos of the property showing the downward slope of the proposed pole barn. He noted the height of the building is related to overhead venting for dust collection and woodworking, or possibly a car lift. He noted the house is a walkout rambler and on the back side the home is actually two stories but due to the way defined height is calculated it does not increase the height at all. Crosby asked how tall the front of the house is. Mr. Peterson replied it is about 15.5 feet and the rear is approximately 22-25 feet. Crosby clarified the Applicant is looking to make the accessory building 17 feet in height. Mr. Peterson noted 17 is the peak height but defined height would be 15 feet and the defined height of the house is about 12.5 feet.