Laserfiche WebLink
MIMTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLA>TM>'G COMMISSION MEETING <br />Moaday, October 18,2004 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(804-3024 City of Orono, Vehicle Storage, Continued) <br />Bremer suggested that type of language be included in g (2). <br />Leslie stated his comments «ytc directed more at staff and whether they w ould like to see periodic <br />inspections. <br />Gaffron indicated he would prefer Staff not be required to conduct periodic inspections unless <br />absolutely necessary. <br />Bremer inquired vshether the S0>foot setback could be tc\*iscd slightly to take into account lots that are <br />not as w ide. <br />Gaffron slated there might be a few lots that could not meet the 50-foot setback, but noted that the <br />minimum lot size is five acres in order to store large vehicles without a permit. <br />Leslie inquired whether there arc any such lots that currently ha\e large vchiclc.s that would fall under <br />this ordinance. <br />Gaffron stated he is not aware of any lots that would not be able to meet the 50-loot setback that <br />currently base large vehicles. <br />Jurgens inquired whether language could be incoiporaicd into the ordinance that would address that <br />issue should the need arise. <br />Rremer indicated she personally it not aware of any lots that have large vehicles that could not meet <br />the 50-foot setback, but that there might be one or two that do rust <br />Jurgens pointed out the intent behind the ordinance is to try to phase out storage of large vehicles on <br />residential lots. Jurgens stated that issue could be dealt with if it should occur and that it may not be <br />necessary to revise the 50-fool setback. <br />Kempf commented the person could also come before the Planning Commission and ask for a <br />vanaiKe to the 50-foot setback. <br />Rahn inquired whether it would be bctia to include language that lots less than 200 feet in width meet <br />a setback of 25 percent the width of the lot or 50 feet, whichescr is more restnciisc <br />Gaffron stated m his opiniim it should be left as is because you would basically end up with the same <br />result follow ing that method and that the real issue is if there is a lot that is less than 100 feet. <br />Bremer inquired w hether all the vehicles that Staff is aware of would be able to meet the SO-foot <br />setback. <br />PAGE 3 <br />J