Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,June 15,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Bollis said that is why he is not in favor of the additional language,because he does not think it is causing <br /> a problem right now. He would not be in favor of making it harder and doing 18 feet, especially if the <br /> City is really only concerned about the lake lots with this, because he understands the width could be 50 <br /> feet at the lake and taper down to less at the street. He added that it does not make sense to him. <br /> Barnhart commented that he could have his notes reflect that Bollis does not support 1746. <br /> Ressler stated he thinks the 18-foot minimum is reasonable for the calculations and numbers that have <br /> been put in place. If there are situations such as Bollis mentioned and Staff recommends approval, it <br /> would allow the Planning Commission to entertain that as a variance to allow that to be placed. His <br /> understanding of the City Code is to capture as much but not everything as far as situations. If everything <br /> was captured,there would not be a need for a Planning Commission. <br /> Barnhart noted there are processes for variances. It is different from the process for variances through the <br /> zoning code. <br /> Bollis stated he does not believe the Planning Commission should be adding additional code that is going <br /> to create variances if it is not an issue today. He does not see that it has become an issue. He has not seen <br /> a variance request for it. <br /> Barnhart said Staff has been able to suggest that they do not apply for one and fix the issue. Staff would <br /> be helped with having standards in place in those discussions. <br /> Bollis stated he feels that anytime a number is put on something, someone is going to come in and ask for <br /> something different, such as 25%hardcover and someone coming in to ask for 26%. It says 18 feet;they <br /> are going to come in and ask for 17 feet, 16 feet, etc. He said an issue is being created by adding it in. He <br /> does not see the issue of"snow piling" on current subdivisions and is not in favor of it. <br /> Gettman stated he supports the 18 feet. <br /> Ressler noted, as Barnhart mentioned,the text amendments regarding subdivision is not urgent and could <br /> be tabled. He does not think it would be unreasonable,and noted that is what the deliberation is currently. <br /> Kirchner commented that Barnhart asked for the Commissioners' opinion on minor subdivisions and lot <br /> splits. He said he agrees with Barnhart that the Commission should not allow for those to happen without <br /> this process and protocol, especially if the vast majority of what Staff is seeing would fall into that <br /> criteria. He thinks it is prudent to keep that in place. <br /> Bollis moved,Kirchner seconded,to table LA19-000065 City of Orono,Text Amendment: <br /> Subdivisions. Roll Call Vote: Ayes 3 (Erickson,Bollis,Kirchner), Nays 3(Libby,Gettman,Ressler). <br /> Motion failed. <br /> Barnhart stated Staff is not opposed to bringing this back with some of the changes made. It is an <br /> important document in the development of the community, and he does not want to rush it. He does not <br /> have an Applicant coming in and ready to apply this. He will incorporate the changes that he can <br /> incorporate and call out the areas he cannot; the Commission can review it again at the next meeting. <br /> Ressler asked if it was an option to leave it as-is and not make a motion. <br /> Page 18 of 19 <br />