My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-09-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
02-09-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 10:27:59 AM
Creation date
1/19/2023 12:32:41 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
324
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, January 20,2004 <br />6:00 o ’clock p.m. <br />accessory building.4 <br />He encouraged the Planning Commission to ask the applicant to confirm the intended uses of this <br />building once the kitchen is removed, to ensure that the above findings are satisfied. <br />Kitchen removal should include the following, in the opinion of staff: <br />1 . Remove stove and microwave oven, if any. <br />2. Remove refrigerator. <br />3. Remove kitchen sink and associated plumbing. <br />Planning Commission should confirm that these are the appropriate fixtures to be removed to result <br />in the conversion from a ’guest house ’ use to an ‘accessory structure with plumbing’ use. The <br />fixtures to be removed will be documented as ‘not allowed to be reinstalled’ in the CUP resolution. <br />Gaffron stated that staff recommends approval of the CUP for plumbing in the accessory structure, <br />subject to the following: <br />1. Applicants to execute standard ‘use limitation’ covenants as required by City Ordinance. <br />2. Conversion from guest house ’ status to ’accessory building with plumbing’ status will <br />require removal of existing kitchen facilities includmg stove and microwave oven, if any, <br />refrigerator; and kitchen sink and associated plumbing. <br />While Mr. Pierpont agreed with staff’s conditions, he questioned whether what he used for a <br />kitchen sink, which was an antique piece of furniture housing a sink, could be differentiated from a <br />kitchen sink. In addition, he pointed out that the guest house provides a small refrigerator and cook <br />top. Pierpont pointed out that it was their mtent to divide the properties into 4 acre and 2 acre sites. <br />He argued that due to the change in code, the '/» acre wetland has diminished their property to the <br />point at which they cannot have their guest house. He maintained that the wetland has always been <br />on the site, as has the stable and guest house, and only the Ordinance change has changed <br />disallowing these things. He asked for an exception. <br />PAGE 46 of 64
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.