Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,October 18,2004 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#04-3024 City of Orono,Vehicle Storage, Continued) <br /> Bremer suggested that type of language be included in g(2). <br /> Leslie stated his comments were directed more at staff and whether they would 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 whether the 50-foot setback could be revised slightly to take into account lots that are <br /> not as wide. <br /> Gaffron stated 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 are any such lots that currently have large vehicles 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-foot setback that <br /> currently have large vehicles. <br /> Jurgens inquired whether language could be incorporated into the ordinance that would address that <br /> issue should the need arise. <br /> Bremer indicated she personally is 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 exist. <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-foot setback. <br /> Kempf commented the person could also come before the Planning Commission and ask for a <br /> variance to the 50-foot setback. <br /> Rahn inquired whether it would be better 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,whichever is more restrictive. <br /> Gaffron stated in his opinion it should be left as is because you would basically end up with the same <br /> result following that method and that the real issue is if there is a lot that is less than 100 feet. <br /> Bremer inquired whether all the vehicles that Staff is aware of would be able to meet the 50-foot <br /> setback. <br /> PAGE 3 <br />