My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-14-2017 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2017
>
08-14-2017 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2019 8:22:04 AM
Creation date
5/29/2019 8:08:47 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.
/
422
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 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, July 17, 2017 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />Landgraver stated he voted on the ordinance based on believing it was based on side lots and that in his <br />view it was not vetted for the lake yard. <br />Thiesse stated the question he has is whether the side yard follows the whole side lot line. <br />Landgraver stated his understanding was that it would follow the side yard until a certain point, which is <br />similar to a fence. <br />Barnhart stated there is an ordinance before the Planning Commission tonight that would prohibit <br />structures within the 75 -foot zone. The Planning Commission could recommend approval of the <br />ordinance, recommend no change to the existing ordinance, or modify the draft. <br />Schoenzeit noted the impact of these structures is minimal, and if more complaints are received, the <br />Planning Commission can revisit it. <br />Landgraver commented the City approved the ordinance, and by reversing it, it appears the City is <br />over -regulating things. Landgraver stated it is likely that someone at some point will build something that <br />does not quite meet the rules and then the City will have to come back and adjust the language. <br />Schwingler commented it is not possible to envision every transgression. <br />Schoenzeit asked whether Staff will send a letter to a property owner if the ordinance is changed. <br />Barnhart noted the existing ones would be allowed to remain. <br />Lemke stated one complaint should not necessitate the need for a change. <br />Schoenzeit stated in his view the City is looking to pass something that doesn't fix a single complaint. <br />Landgraver stated he does not think the Planning Commission looked at the lake yard when originally <br />considering the ordinance, but if the City now excludes the lake yard, it will look like they are over- <br />regulating. <br />Page 4 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.