Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF TAE <br />. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> � . Monday,August 16,2010 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Feuss stated the issue she has with the first three bullets is that there is no objective standard and that the <br /> language would allow for some regulatory body to have undefined discretion in determining what is <br /> historically significant. Feuss indicated she prefers the fourth bullet point since it says,this shall include <br /> historical buildings or properties on, or determined eligible for,national, state or local historical registers <br /> or inventories and provides some guidance to the City Council or Planning Commission. - <br /> Chair Kang opened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. <br /> Sam Mar�eld,2455 North Shore Drive, asked if the new rules would make it easier to use the Hill School <br /> as far as setbacks and parking, etc. <br /> Curtis stated this language talks about potentially relocating a building to a new site where the property <br /> owner would be required to meet all of the zoning requirements and other regulations. The City feels it is <br /> important to preserve historical buildings but,that this proposal does not have anything to do with the <br /> existing Hill School building on its current site. <br /> Marfield stated he has concerns that this will affect the Hill School property. <br /> � Curtis noted this would not affect the Hill School property unless the building is moved and turned into <br /> an accessory building. <br /> Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 7:33 p.m. <br /> Feuss reiterated that the definition under the fourth bullet is good because it already contains a standard <br /> that is in existence,but that they should include language at the end that allows the City Council and/or <br /> the Planning Commission to determine whether a building has historical significance and is an important <br /> part of the City's heritage worthy of protection from changes or destruction. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the building does not have to be 100 years old in order to be preserved and asked <br /> whether the word historical should be eliminated. <br /> Kang indicated she does not feel the word historical should be eliminated. <br /> Feuss concurred a building does not need to be old in order to be historical. <br /> ` Curtis stated by allowing the Council to determine significance to some extent leaves the code <br /> amendment somewhat flexible. ' <br /> Feuss commented she likes the word"shall"so the Council has the discretion to designate a building as <br /> historically, culturally or architecturally significant. The City Council would have no discretion if the <br /> building is listed on the national, state,or local historical registers. <br /> Schoenzeit indicated he would have an issue with the word historical unless it does not mean only <br /> buildings that are old. <br /> Schwingler asked what the City's inventory is of old buildings. <br /> Page 9 <br />