My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-23-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
02-23-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 8:52:34 AM
Creation date
1/19/2023 1:20:52 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.
/
357
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
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 <br />Sansevere moved to allow the kitchen to remain provided it never be expanded in <br />any way. The motion failed as no one seconded it <br />Murphy asked if there was any restriction on the City pursuing the kitchen issue because <br />of the way it came up: accidentally during a lot line rearrangement application. Barrett <br />replied that there was nothing to prevent the City from addressing the fact that the <br />expected lot combination never happened. <br />McMillan moved, and White seconded, to approve the CUP subject to the removal of <br />the sink, cooktop, and fridge, and that a covenant be placed to Insure the guest house <br />never be used as a residence. <br />Vote: Ayes 1, Nays 4 (Mayor Peterson, White, Murphy, Sansevere). <br />Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the CUP, allowing the kitchen <br />to remain, with the guest house being regulated by a standard use limitation <br />covenant. <br />Barren stated that the applicant has a guest house, not an accessory building with <br />plumbing, therefore the Pierponts should pursue a CUP for a guest house. He suggested <br />they convert the application to one concerning the guest house, and then Council move to <br />grant a variance to the lot area requirements for the guest house from the 4 acres required <br />to the 3.S that the Pierponts have available. <br />Moorse stated they were moving quickly and suggested they table the item so that staff <br />could pursue the appropriate resolution. Mayor Peterson added they could not go further <br />in that direction without getting the language down. <br />Barrett stated that they would need a covenant and to find a hardship to allow the 3.S acres <br />to support a guest house. Changing the application could raise other issues. At any point, <br />the applicants could opt to remove the kitchen according to the current application. <br />Mr. Pierpont stated they would do whatever is necessary. He stated that the lot was <br />considered 4 full acres before the rule changed concerning wetlands. The guest house <br />existed and was allowed before that time. <br />Murphy asked if they could be grandfathered in. Barrett replied the guest house never <br />would have been allowed if they had not agreed to combine the lots in 1990. <br />Mayor Peterson stated they would need an extension from the applicant to table it. <br />Gundlach stated the City could authorize the first extension, and said she would send the <br />Pierponts a letter to that effect.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.