My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-19-2016 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2016
>
09-19-2016 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2019 2:23:27 PM
Creation date
9/20/2016 10:08:30 AM
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.
/
276
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
FILE#16-3864 <br /> 13 Sept 2016 <br /> Page 6 of 7 <br /> 4. No future subdivision will be approved that places the structure within a lot that has <br /> no principal structure, except that the city in its subdivision approval may grant a <br /> finite time period in which the oversized accessory structure may remain without a <br /> principal structure, in order that a principal structure may be constructed. At the end <br /> of this time period,the oversized accessory structure must be removed if no principal <br /> structure has been constructed. <br /> 5. If the property is subdivided,the oversize accessory structure and principal structure <br /> will be located together within a lot that meets the minimum lot area requirement <br /> for the given size of accessory building. <br /> 6. In subdivision approval,the setback required for the oversize accessory structure <br /> shall remain. <br /> Septic System Status <br /> The property has been tested and viable septic sites have been located.The applicant is still <br /> developing a final plan to be reviewed by our Building Official prior to permitting. <br /> Practical Difficulties Statement <br /> Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, <br /> and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. <br /> Practical Difficulties and Conditional Use Permit Analysis <br /> Staff finds the criteria permitting a guest house conditional use permit have been satisfied. <br /> Regarding the variance for the location of the guest house to be closer to the street than the <br /> principal structure,staff finds that the location makes sense. While technically the proposed use <br /> for the undeveloped property can be accomplished in keeping with the Code,the location <br /> shown is potentially the least impactful to adjacent properties. <br /> Engineer Comments <br /> The City engineer has performed a cursory review of the site plans and identified no immediate <br /> concerns. A comprehensive review of the plans will be conducted at the time of the building <br /> permit application. <br /> Public Comments <br /> The applicant has provided a list with signatures of supporting neighbors as well as supportive <br /> comments from both of the abutting neighbors on the north and south.The planning <br /> commission should note the comments attached as Exhibit F. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the CUP and variance(s), if granted, will not <br /> alter the essential character of the neighborhood? <br /> 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the <br /> impacts created by the granting of the requested CUP and variance(s)? <br /> 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> Planning Commission Options for Consideration <br /> The Planning Commission may consider the following alternative motions: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.