01-26-1998 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r MINUTES OF TEIE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 25,1996 (#5 - #2192 Robert and Wendy Beutler - Continued) Mr. Beutler s^d it was not their intent to use the structure as living space for others but only for additional space for workshop. He noted the building is in e.\cellent shape and there is no problem with hardcover on the property. Beutler said he and his neighbors feel it would be a shame to remove such a building. Beutler said the 120' separation from house and accessory structure was a reason to request the bathroom facility remain. He indicated the sewer line could be hooked up to for the new house as well as old. He volunteered to place limitations on the property on the abstract itself noting the restrictive covenant would run with the property on the chain of title. Goetten was informed the proposed size of the new residence is 1200 s.f. Jabbour explained to the applicant how Orono is seen as a bedroom community and only allows guest houses if there is adequate room for future subdivision and an additional sewer access charge is paid. It is Ws opinion that this application is in direct conflict with the objectives of the City. He noted concern with what could happen in the future and sees a solution with the removal of plumbing and heating. Jabbour indicated that approval of the accessory structure usage with plumbing and heating would have a domino effect on a policy beyond this proposal. Hurt was informed the current garage would be utilized by the new residence also. There were no public comments. Hurr noted that the cost of enforcement would be bom by the applicant. Mabusth indicated the current resolution does not stipulate that but could be amended. Callahan informed that this would not protect the City. Kelley moved, Jabbour seconded, to approve Resolution #3806 for the lot width variance only. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Hurr asked for an explanation on previous applications. She inquired if a CUP for a ^est house could be obtained. Mabusth noted the lack of appropriate acreage as found in the other applications. She said she would like to see standards developed. Hurr said she would be in support of the proposal if the plumbing was removed. Mabusth did note the applicants intend to live in the structure while the new residence is being built. Kelley indicated if the lot was vacant and a new structure was built and the applicant desired an accessory structure, he could do so. He informed the applicant if the heating and plumbing were removed, the structure could remain without requiring the City's approval. Jabbour asked the applicant to work with Staff on what makes a structure an accessory structure.