My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-29-2018 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2018
>
05-29-2018 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/24/2019 8:47:06 AM
Creation date
5/24/2019 8:39:26 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.
/
214
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 <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, April 23, 2018 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />23. RENTAL LICENSE 1440-1442 SHORELINE DRIVE — Continued <br />Seals asked if the slips were approved for the docks. <br />Barnhart stated to his belief in 2011 there were some modifications with the expansion of boat slips and at <br />that point the City Council used the analysis done in 1989 and came to the conclusion that no additional <br />parking was required. <br />Seals asked how many slips there are currently. <br />Barnhart stated to his knowledge there are 97, with 20 of them being for rental boats. <br />Rief noted the 26 parking spaces are only on the two residential properties. <br />Seals commented people are parking all over the road and that she does not see how they will have <br />parking space for someone in a rental. <br />Mattick stated the City Council cannot unwind something from 2011. Mattick stated the number of <br />parking stalls had been met when they applied for their conditional use permit, and that even though there <br />have been complaints, Staff has found no violations from 1989 or 2011. Mattick noted the rental just <br />requires two parking stalls per property and each lot has that. Mattick stated the concern appears to be <br />that it seems they0 are double dipping on the other 26. <br />Seals commented she is not trying to change what happened in 1989 or in 2011, but that she does not see <br />an additional four parking stalls for the rentals based on the current use. <br />Walsh stated there is nothing that stops them from using those parking spots and that they do not need to <br />provide an additional four spaces. Walsh stated the conditional use permit was written poorly that long <br />ago and basically has no restrictions on how the parking can be used. <br />Mattick stated they are not exclusive parking stalls and there is no way for the City to contest that there <br />are not two parking stalls for the tenant. <br />Seals stated the no parking areas should be enforced. <br />Mattick stated if the City could relook at the intensity of the use, it is likely some of those things would <br />not be allowed, but that a lot of those things cannot now be undone. Mattick noted if the rental meets the <br />requirements, the City is obligated to allow it. <br />Walsh stated it is a matter of enforcing the no parking along the street and the late-night deliveries. <br />Crosby asked if the rental license crosses over into commercial. <br />Barnhart stated the two residences are on residentially zoned parcels. <br />Crosby commented they are basically being used in a commercial aspect. <br />Page 8 of 16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.