Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #929 <br />July 12, 1985 <br />Page 2 <br />2. There are confli::ting statements on file as to whether the <br />official minutes are accurate and whether they reflect the actual <br />intent of the Planning Commision and Council in 1974 and 1975. <br />3. The structure was not, in fact removed. Only the frame cabin <br />portion was removed, leaving the foundation and basement portion <br />remaining. <br />4. The remaining structure has in fact been used as a guest <br />cabin on occasion since the main home was constructed, and con­ <br />tains plumbing. <br />5. Regardless of whether or not the structure is legally <br />existing on the property, the guest house use requires a <br />conditional use permit per Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision <br />3 (G). <br />6. Mr. Rahn's "withdrawal of the application for a guest house <br />conditional use permit suggests that he intends to discontinue <br />the use as a guest house. Regardless of whether a guest house <br />conditional use permit is granted, the structure, by virture of <br />its location partially within the 0-75' setback zone, is non- <br />conforming and subject to the pertinent ordinances. A <br />conditional use permit for recognizing any continued use of the <br />non-conforming structure would be appropriate if the structure is <br />allowed to remain. <br />Based on the facts you have been give, what is your <br />recommendation; <br />a) Should the non-conforming accessory structure be allowed to <br />remain? <br />b) If it is allowed to remain, would you recommend a conditional <br />use permit for the guest house use? <br />c) If you do not recommend granting a conditional use permit for <br />guest house, note that staff must inspect the structure to deter­ <br />mine necessary alterations within so that it will not be con­ <br />sidered as a second residential unit (i.e. plumbing removed).