Laserfiche WebLink
r- ■ • <br />■ f i . ,=,. .fcr.-S'^ <br />V* ■■ <br />r.: <br />i?i. <br />Hi <br />«t;’' <br />f wV, i ^ <br />H-,c, <br />> ■' -V>. • > <br />m#tfc- <br />i!^i#- <br />V <br />■>?;C <br />y$^-'i‘--...... <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />HELD FEBRUARY 18, 1992 <br />ROLL <br />Planning Commission met on the above date with the <br />members present: Planning Commission Chair Charlie <br />Planning Commission Members Maureen Bellows, Charles <br />and Jeff Johnson. Candace Rowlette, Ed Cohen and Sara <br />absent. The following represented the City Staff: <br />Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant <br />Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron and City Recorder <br />Terl Naab. Edward Callahan was present to represe.it the City <br />Council. Chair Kelley called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. <br />The Orono <br />foI lowing <br />KeI ley and <br />Schroeder, <br />Moos were <br />(#1) AMENDMENT OF SHORELAND REGULATIONS - <br />PUBLIC HEARING 8:00 - 8:06 P.M. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. <br />Chair Kelley noted all the work done by the Lake Use Committee In <br />drafting the proposed ordinance. He felt the Commission did not <br />need to review each item, as that was what the Committee was set <br />up for. He announced the City’s intent was to pass the ordinance, <br />then send it on to the DNR for review and also send it to other <br />surrounding cities to let them know what Orono’s positions are on <br />the proposed DNR’s regulations. He noted that some areas are more <br />restrictive than the DNR’s regulations, and in some areas the DNR <br />has been more restrictive than what Orono currently has in force. <br />Bellows asked what wi I ' happen to previously approved subdivided <br />properties that will no linger meet buildable standards. <br />Gaffron noted the proposed ordinance wi I I treat a vacant lot <br />created under previously existing ordinances which does not meet <br />current standards, as non-conforming. He stated that lots such as <br />this will need a variance tc build upon. <br />Mabusth directed them to review the sewage treatment setback, <br />noted that has not changed, which means septic testing <br />previously subdivided lots will not have changed. <br />and <br />for <br />Bellows asked what happens to lot area calculations <br />Gaffron noted they did not change calculations foi dry buildable <br />land. He indicated that slopes on a property could be problematic <br />to septic systems, but the City does not feel comfortable in saying <br />all areas of land with slope of ^Q% or greater are not buildable. <br />Bellows asked If this would force them to change the definition of <br />dry bull dab Ie. <br />H