Laserfiche WebLink
. RE�ULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JUNE 15, 1978 Page 21 <br /> Approval of this proposal would require the CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT <br /> following: 2795 Casco Point Road <br /> (Continued) <br /> l. Conditional use permit� approval for two <br /> additional units to be used as guest houses <br /> 2. Sewer unit charges should be addressed <br /> Planning Commission P4eeting - April 24, 1978 <br /> Mr. Swanson was present and explained his application <br /> that would include the creation of two new apart- <br /> ments off an existing house, a mother-in-law <br /> apartment in the basement of the house and a <br /> separate apartment over an attached dougle garage <br /> for his mother and father to li�e in for a part <br /> of the year. Each apartment, as well as the <br /> existing house, would have separate kitchen and <br /> bath facilities so you would, in effect, have <br /> a triplex if his proposal were approved. The <br /> Planning Commission was concerned with the effect <br /> of building an apartment unit in a single family <br /> zoning distric.t, and noted that the guest house <br /> requirements would reguire a lot size variance <br /> because each separate guest house by the ordinance <br /> is required to have all the requirements of a <br /> single family house on each lot. In this case, <br /> the lot is large enough for one unit, not:•three <br /> units. Dick Hasse.l recommended review of the <br /> plans and redesign to accommodate the guests <br /> without separate facilities or separage entrances. <br /> Gregg Hannah also suggested separate wings would <br /> be all right if the access �vex�e through the house <br /> and not from an outside access_ The Planning <br /> Commission suggested that if the house were <br /> redes.igned to allow for this, a conditional use <br /> permit�may not even be necessary and only an <br /> addition would have to be considered for the house. <br /> Planning Commission Meeting - May 8, 1978 <br /> Applicant John Swanson was present_ rsr. Gaffxon <br /> stated that applicant was di�ected by Planning <br /> Commission to bring in new plans showing an <br /> addition rather than two additional units. <br /> Applicant presented plans showing an addition <br /> to existing house without separate ki.tchen <br /> facilities. Planning Commission re,viewed the <br /> plans and addressed whether variances were <br /> required for the proposed addition. <br /> Motion by Hannah and seconded by Hammerel to <br /> approve the proposal as an addition to a single <br /> family dwelling, approve variance .of 20� of lot <br /> width requirement, with provision that extension <br /> - to the west does not further encroach on present <br /> side setback. Motion carried. (Continued) <br />