Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, July 12, 2010 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br /> Page 13 of 16 <br /> <br />(9. #10-3454 CITY OF ORONO – ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT – CONDITIONAL USE <br />STANDARDS, Continued) <br /> <br />Mattick stated if traffic becomes an issue, the City could require a traffic study. Any intensification of a <br />use will likely be an inconvenience. <br /> <br />White suggested the word demonstrable be used. <br /> <br />Mattick stated demonstrable would be fine in that context. <br />Bremer stated Item 14 seems out of sync with this ordinance because it specifically relates to lighting and <br />not other items. <br /> <br />Mattick stated that provision is pretty standard in CUPs and that oftentimes exterior lighting is required <br />depending on the type of use. Mattick stated the language would allow the City to control the lighting <br />from spilling over onto the adjoining properties. <br /> <br />Turner pointed out that if Orono had a comprehensive lighting ordinance, that language would not be <br />needed. <br /> <br />Mattick stated the word residential can be removed. Mattick pointed out that in the commercial zones, <br />there would be more shared parking and that this refers more specifically to residential neighborhoods. <br /> <br />McMillan suggested the language be something to the affect that the lighting not be out of character with <br />the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Curtis noted Item No. 6 addresses that. <br /> <br />Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 77, Third Series, an Ordinance <br />Amending Chapter 78 of the Orono City Code Concerning Granting of Permits, with Section <br />1(a)(6) being amended to read, “compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both <br />presently and as it is planned to be used in the future,” and to amend Paragraph 12 to read “Not <br />create excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a <br />demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe access.” VOTE: <br />Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br /> <br />9b. CITY OF ORONO – ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT – CONDITIONAL USES IN THE <br />SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS – REQUEST FOR DIRECTION <br /> <br />Turner stated this is an outgrowth of Item 9 and that the proposed changes are based on state statutes, <br />ordinances in other communities, and suggestions by the Planning Commission. Turner indicated the <br />tables outline the zoning district, the current code, and the proposed changes. <br /> <br />Murphy asked if the items on Page 4 as they relate to residential districts would impact the Welsh <br />application. <br /> <br />Curtis stated it was added as a conditional use in an RPUD only. <br /> <br />Turner stated the hospitals, sanitariums, etc., was only permitted in the RR-1B district. <br /> <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda - 07/26/2010 <br />Approval Council Minutes 07/12/2010 [Page 13 of 16]