My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-12-2017 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2017
>
06-12-2017 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/24/2019 3:05:12 PM
Creation date
5/24/2019 2:54:51 PM
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.
/
351
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
CITY OF ORONO <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, May 15,2017 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />Barnhart stated if individual neighborhoods are rezoned, someone could make an argument for spot <br />zoning. Barnhart stated if the zoning parameters are changed, he would not consider that spot zoning. <br />Thiesse stated one possible way would be to make it administrative from eight to ten, and if it does not <br />meet what the City is looking for, the person would need to apply for a variance. <br />Barnhart stated whatever the setback is approved at, he would be able to approve it, and that in his view <br />this version of the draft ordinance solves what the City is trying to achieve. <br />Schoenzeit stated in his view the 10 -foot setback, even on small lots, is another nice feature to prevent <br />homes from being on top of one another. Schoenzeit noted the City can look at the variances on a case- <br />by-case basis. <br />Thiesse stated since a side yard setback typically is not requested by itself, it would not really help <br />streamline the process at all. <br />Leskinen indicated she is in agreement and that it would be better to look at the lot on an overall basis. <br />Barnhart noted there are three issues that are being addressed with the draft ordinance. The first is side <br />yard setbacks and nonconforming lots. The second issue was unimproved rights-of-way, and the third <br />was side yards adjacent to the street. <br />Schoenzeit stated the goal of streamlining things will not happen and that these are unique situations that <br />should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. <br />Thiesse noted if a person lives next to an unimproved right-of-way, it might be a case where a person <br />could get by without a variance. <br />Schoenzeit questioned how many of those situations exist and whether it is necessary to change the <br />ordinance to address them. <br />Barnhart stated when you have a nonconforming lot adjacent to an old fire lane and that requires a 30 -foot <br />side yard setback rather than 10 feet, that can be pretty drastic to a property owner. In the case where the <br />Page 5 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.