03-25-1996 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 20, 1996 (#2 Proposed Zoning Amendment - Continued) Roger Zee, whose home is the second lot to the west from the proposed arena site, is concerned'with the 50’ setback requirement for the school Zee noted the arena was not a school entity. Schroeder said the ice arena was the driving issue behind the amendment but noted the other accessory uses also being considered, tennis facilities, field houses, and g>mnasiums. Zee asked what the code now says. Schroeder reiterated that these accessory uses were not presently listed, but it proposed, the school would fall under the conditional use permit for school use Mabusth then reviewed the code as it now stands. It was noted that there is presently a setback requirement of 50' for any building adjacent to the residential district for school use 1 he code did not distinguish between access or principal school uses. The amendment as proposed was noted relating the facilities under consideration, as well as wliere such a facility could be located, the setback from any residential lot, and by whom it shall be owned and/or operated by, namely the school or a non-profit organization under a land lease arrangement with the school. Zee remarked that the ice arena under consideration would not meet the acreage requirements for such a building nor does it meet the height requirement Mabusth said any building would be subject to height restrictions listed in the residential code Zee questioned why another category was being added to the code to allow this usage. Schroeder said the City was contemplating expanding the code for such a facility on the school land because of the non-profit group involvement. Smith asked and received confirmation that if such a building or use was approved, the facility would need to meet existing code. Smith then questioned why the setbacks would be required in the amendment if it already exists in the code She was informed it was because the arena would be a new accessory use to what is presently. Smith then questioned w., • a facility should be a certain number of feet away from the residential district and whether the height restriction for the school should be used for such an accessory use. Mabusth noted that this is what is being asked in the code amendment; Is a 50’ setback adequate for an ice arena? The height restriction is already addressed in the code. Schroeder said performance standards could be set, or those standards already in place could be satisfactory