Laserfiche WebLink
a <br />MINirrES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Moaday, May 16,2005 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />for pucposes of the oversize accessory structure ordinance. Gaffron noted the applicant is proposing a car <br />wash for the lower level and it is recommended that the car washing effluent not go to the septic site. <br />Gaffron stated the future use of this structure and what types of limits should be placed on its future use <br />should be taken into consideration by the Planning Commission. <br />Carlson stated the property owner would like to construct an accessory building to accommodate his <br />collectible cars. Carlson stated tire goal in designing the accessory building was to come up with a plan <br />that complied with the intent of the code and work within a footprint of 1600 feet, including the outlot. <br />Carlson indicated the appearance of a garage with four stalls up and four stalls below was not acceptable <br />and that the building was designed to be partially constructed below ground, which would make the <br />structure leu visible from the adjoining properties and would fit in with the rest of the community. <br />Carlson stated a two-itory structure could be constructed but would be more visible. <br />Carlson pointed out the car wash is not intended to be a commercial car wash and is intended merely to <br />provide the owner with an area to wash a car off with a hose periodically. <br />Carlson stated the hardships relate to the location of the septic and the visrial impact of an above-ground <br />structure to the neighbors. Carlson stated their proposal makes good sense and does not create any <br />hardcover issues. The property owner is aware that the accessory building is not intended for residential <br />use and they ate agreeable to having a covenant on the property prohibiting future residential use of the <br />structure. <br />There were no public comments regarding this application. <br />Rahn stated he does have a concern regarding the future use of this strucfore and noted that covenants stay <br />with the property and not the owner. Rahn inquired whether the cars would be stored on the bottom level. <br />Carlson stated the intent is to store the prized cars in the upper level. <br />Gaffron stated a potential issue is the wetland moratorium that affects properties that are within 26 feet of <br />a wetland. Gaffron stated the City’s proposed wetland ordinance would require a 20-foot setback in <br />m- <br />c..