11-08-2010 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 17 (7. #10-3484 CITY OF ORONO – AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1 AND 78-1434 (HISTORIC BUILDINGS), Continued) The Planning Commission indicated that an amendment to the current codes was an appropriate method of providing a preservation tool for buildings deemed by the City to have historic significance. The Commission also desired a means of keeping the historic building “historic” once the exception to the size limitation was made rather than allowing a new, oversized building constructed in its place. The desire to keep the historic building “historic” posed a new challenge which the adoption of Interim Use Permit standards would seem to solve. At the September 20th meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendment and IUP ordinance with a 5-0 vote. Murphy noted on page one of the draft ordinance, a historic building means any building or collection of buildings. Murphy asked what standard would be applied to determine what is historic. Franchot commented it was his understanding the City Council would have the ability to declare it historic. Gaffron noted the City does not have any buildings that are on the National Register of Historic Places or other historic registers. The City does have a list that the state historic office had compiled approximately 20 or 30 years ago of buildings that they believe have historical significance. Curtis stated if the building has not been put on a historic register, then the City Council can determine whether it is historic. Murphy stated an example of an old building is the red barn that was torn down a few years ago. Murphy indicated he also has an old red barn and asked whether that would be considered historic. White commented that typically buildings have to be older than 70 years to quality as a historic building. Murphy commented he would like to avoid unintended consequences by any language in the ordinance. Mattick stated the ordinance language is somewhat broad to allow for Orono to compile some historic standards that they would like to utilize. Murphy stated he has a concern with the process that any city council at any given time could make a determination that something is historic. Bremer stated any future city council could give themselves that power if they so desired. Bremer noted this ordinance is fairly limited. Mattick pointed out it only goes to the relocation of a historic building. McMillan commented the ordinance also opens the door to IUPs and that the City Council should look at interim use permits more thoroughly. McMillan asked whether this would be an IUP for historic buildings or other things in general. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 9 of 17]