Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> MARCH 19,2001 <br /> (#01-2663 Craig Alshouse, Continued) <br /> Kluth inquired whether the lot containing the two oversized accessory buildings was still being <br /> considered as a commons area. <br /> Alshouse stated they did initially look at that concept,but ran into a number of problems. Alshouse <br /> stated the owner of that lot would be forced to take care of everyone else's horses under that concept, <br /> which was not feasible. <br /> Kluth stated he would be in favor of continuing the present use of the two structures. <br /> Mabusth stated commercial use of the structures would need to be limited in her view. <br /> Alshouse stated he would like the future owner of this lot to have the right to continue to utilize the <br /> barn for the housing of horses as currently allowed. <br /> Hawn commented the only reason she can see for maintaining the two oversized accessory structures <br /> would be to continue the tradition of horse farms in Orono. Hawn stated in her view the <br /> Planning Commission needs to restrict the future use of these structures. Hawn inquired whether the <br /> Planning Commission could put a time limit on the life on these buildings where they would need to <br /> be removed within a certain period of time if a conditional use permit is not applied for. <br /> Gaffron stated the City has allowed accessory buildings to remain on a vacant lot for a short period of <br /> time until the principal structure is constructed. <br /> Hawn stated she has concerns that someone with a business will buy the property and attempt to <br /> operate a commercial business out of these structures. Hawn indicated she would like to see private <br /> or commercial storage in these buildings restricted. <br /> It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that they would be opposed to any private or <br /> commercial use of the two oversized accessory structures other than for horses. <br /> Alshouse stated he does not have a problem with restricting these buildings for the use of livestock. <br /> Alshouse stated the new property owner would need to meet Orono's ordinances for <br /> whatever use he intends for the structures. <br /> Kluth stated a restrictive covenant could be placed on the land. <br /> Alshouse stated he would be agreeable to a restrictive covenant on the land restricting the barns for <br /> livestock use or some other use that is permitted under Orono's ordinances. <br /> Smith commented in her view the Planning Commission cannot say the buildings need to be <br /> removed in one to two years simply because the structures are not being used. Smith stated the <br /> new property owner could elect not to use the structures and leave them empty, with a future buyer <br /> electing five or ten years from now to utilize them for the housing of animals. <br /> Hawn stated in her view if the buildings are to be used at all,they should be restricted to livestock. <br /> Smith stated if the future owner decides to use the buildings for a commercial use,they would be <br /> PAGE 8 <br />