Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, April 18,2016 <br /> 6:30 dclock p.m. <br /> Barnhart stated the FAR provides more options than the 15 percent and would probably result in homes <br /> with a lower height. Barnhart stated Staff is looking for feedback on this item from the public and that <br /> there will be additional discussion at a future work session. Barnhart stated Staff is wondering whether <br /> they should move forward both of the options or just one. <br /> Landgraver stated it comes down to 15 percent versus the FAR and the definition of grade. Landgraver <br /> indicated he would be willing to table it to the next work session. <br /> Curtis asked if there is anything the Planning Commission would like to see from Staff to help facilitate <br /> the next discussion. <br /> Thiesse stated the FAR is being crafted to match the 15 percent as close as possible. <br /> Landgraver stated he is trying to visual what the difference would be between the two. <br /> Curtis indicated Staff can provide some illustrations that will help demonstrate that. Curtis stated Staff <br /> would like the Planning Commission to consider ways in which the massing can be reduced but also <br /> provide some leeway in how someone can use their property. <br /> Schoenzeit stated another question to consider would be what a variance would look like under the FAR <br /> option. <br /> Curtis stated the City does not grant very many structural coverage variances and that the FAR will be a <br /> different concept for Staff to use. <br /> Thiesse asked if there is a reason to stay at the 2-acre size. <br /> Curtis stated the thinking is that there will be a high end of the break point and that Staff is trying to stay <br /> with a similar amount of footprint that would be allowed. <br /> Barnhart stated there is a trade-off in order to make the concept a little easier to understand for the <br /> applicant and that some property owners will benefit and some will not. The City will have to accept <br /> those trade-offs if the change the massing regulations. <br /> Landgraver moved, Thiesse seconded,to table Application No. 16-3815, City of Orono Zoning Code <br /> Amendment regarding the definition of half-story. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br /> 7. #16-3823 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING A PROCESS <br /> TO REVIEW CONCEPT PLANS AND SKETCH PLANS, 10:27 P.M.— 10:31 P.M. <br /> Barnhart stated this item ranked 10 in the list of ordinances to review. Staff has drafted an ordinance that <br /> establishes a concept review process for zoning code amendments, zoning map amendments, land use <br /> amendments, and other things that are mare policy in nature. The Council and Planning Commission <br /> should provide feedback on the concept plan review process. <br /> The ordinance also removes the requirement that a Class III subdivision go through the sketch plan <br /> process. The sketch plan process is recommended but Staff has removed that as a requirement to help <br /> meet the 120-day time limit. <br /> Page 29 of 32 <br />