Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 16,2010 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Curtis stated Staff does not have a precise inventory of historical buildings within the City at the present <br /> time and are unsure how many possibly exist. Curtis noted when she first started with the City she did <br /> look at a particular boat house to see whether it had any historical significance to the area. Since the <br /> � home had been rebuilt,the boat house was not considered to be a historical building. The City does not <br /> have an inventory of historical buildings. <br /> Feuss stated the question is whether it would be worth the resources to create an inventory. <br /> Schwingler commented they should be able to craft appropriate language to deal with that. <br /> Curtis stated in her view the number of historical buildings would be very limited. <br /> Leskinen stated it would be better to deal with the buildings on a case-by-case basis. Leskinen stated she <br /> would like to see some language included that would address the deterioration of historical buildings. <br /> Curtis noted a person currently is allowed to maintain or rebuild a structure in kind. <br /> Schwingler commented a local historical preservation society could perhaps be created for Orono. <br /> Feuss stated the question is whether the appropriate language can be crafted tonight or whether the <br /> Planning Commission should consider this amendment at a work session. Feuss stated she would like a <br /> provision that automatically includes buildings that are currently on a register and language that also <br /> gives the City Council some discretion along with some requirements for the preservation of the building. <br /> Schwingler commented he would like to get the input of the City Attorney on the language. <br /> Kang moved,Schoenzeit seconded,to table Application#10-3484,City of Orono,Code <br /> Amendment,Historic Buildings. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0. <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS <br /> 5. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING CITY <br /> COUNCIL MEETINGS ON JULY 26,2010,AND AUGUST 9,2010 . <br /> Feuss reported on the July 26, 2010, City Council meeting,noting that the majority of the items were <br /> placed on the Consent Agenda. <br /> Schwingler stated two issues that were discussed at the August 9`�'meeting were the Terry Schneider � <br /> application and the Roedel application. The memory care building proposed by Schneider was reduced in <br /> size in order to eliminate the need for the setback variance. The Roedel application was denied based on <br /> the recent MN Supreme Court ruling. <br /> 6. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION <br /> None <br /> Page <br /> 10 <br />