My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-20-1998 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1998
>
01-20-1998 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2023 1:16:23 PM
Creation date
7/27/2023 1:04:36 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.
/
496
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 REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 25,1996 <br />(#5 - #2192 Robert and Wendy Beutler - Continued) <br />Mr. Beutler said it was not theu" intent to use the structure as living space for others but <br />only for additional space for workshop. He noted the building is in excellent shape and <br />there is no problem with hardcover on the property. Beutler said he and his neighbors <br />feel it would be a shame to remove such a building. Beutler said the 120' separation from <br />house and accessory structure was a reason to request the bathroom facility remain. He <br />indicated the sewer line could be hooked up to for the new house as well as old. He <br />volunteered to place limitations on the property on the abstract itself noting the restrictive <br />covenant would nin with the property on the chain of title. <br />Goetten was informed the proposed size of the new residence is 1200 s.f. <br />Jabbour explained to the applicant how Orono is seen as a bedroom community and only <br />allows guest houses if there is adequate room for future subdivision and an additional <br />sewer access charge is paid. It is Ws opinion that this application is in direct conflict with <br />the objectives of the City. He noted concern with what could happen in the future and <br />sees a solution with the removal of plumbing and heating. Jabbour indicated that <br />approval of the accessory structure usage with plumbing and heating would have a <br />domino effect on a policy beyond this proposal. <br />Hurr was informed the current garage would be utilized by the new residence also. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Hurr noted that the cost of enforcement would be bom by the applicant. Mabusth <br />indicated the current resolution does not stipulate that but could be amended. Callahan <br />informed that this would not protect the City. <br />Kelley moved, Jabbour seconded, to approve Resolution #3806 for the lot width variance <br />only. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />Hurr asked for an explanation on previous applications. She inquired if a CUP for a <br />guest house could be obtained. Mabusth noted the lack of appropriate acreage as found <br />in the other applications. She said she would like to see standards developed. Hiot said <br />she would be in support of the proposal if the plumbing was removed. Mabusth did note <br />the applicants intend to live in the structure while the new residence is being built. <br />Kelley indicated if the lot was vacant and a new structure was built and the applicant <br />desired an accessory structure, he could do so. He informed the applicant if the heating <br />and plumbing were removed, the structure could remain without requiring the Cit/s <br />approval. <br />Jabbour asked the applicant to work with Staff on what makes a structure an accessory <br />structure. <br />.111
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.