Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 21,2012 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Mattick stated he would recommend that Item No. 1 be eliminated but that in his view Item No.3 is <br /> acceptable. Mattick stated the Planning Commission should discuss the length of time that a boat may be <br /> docked on a private dock and whether that time period should be shorter or longer. Mattick stated there <br /> could also be a number of situations where people may have riparian rights that he is unaware of. Mattick <br /> stated in his opinion Item No. 2 is also achievable. <br /> Landgraver stated there could be a situation where the property owner rents out the property but still <br /> maintains control of the dock,which further complicates things. <br /> Levang stated as it relates to property owners in Item No.2,whether that would include renters. <br /> Mattick indicated the City currently does not distinguish that type of situation. Mattick indicated the <br /> language could be changed to read occupant rather than property owner. Mattick indicated the Planning <br /> Commission will need to decide whether they want the owner/occupant to determine who utilizes the <br /> dock. . <br /> Gaffron stated one of the issues with using the term occupant is that it is also di�cult to define. If the <br /> house is not being lived in but they have access to the dock, does that constitute occupancy. <br /> Mattick commented that has also been an issue under the current code. <br /> Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 7:02 p.m. <br /> Rich Anderson, 3205 Crystal Bay Road, stated he is the owner of three marinas in Orono and that he has <br /> been in business in Orono since 1976. Anderson stated he is attempting to protect what he is regulated to <br /> do as the owner of a marina. Anderson noted marinas are highly regulated and that it seems like the City <br /> is opening up a can of worms with this ordinance. Anderson indicated the reason people do not put boats <br /> in their name is due to liability issues and that if you have a relative dock his boat at your dock,that boat <br /> could be put in the property owner's name. . <br /> Anderson stated he currently knows of two or three situations that are likely illegal on the road near Smith <br /> Bay and another two situations where there are boats sitting on the side of County Road 51. The onus <br /> should not be on the neighboring property owner to turn in his neighbor. Anderson noted marinas are in <br /> the business of renting out dock slips and that a conditional use permit would be a viable option for <br /> people who want to rent residential docks. Anderson commented that residential dock rentals impact his <br /> livelihood. <br /> Schoenzeit asked which item in the text amendment Mr.Anderson would be opposed to. <br /> Anderson stated he is fine with relatives but that the boat should be in the property owner's name. <br /> Anderson commented he does not know who his neighbors are 1,000 feet away. Anderson questioned <br /> what the City's options would be if number two is allowed for getting someone out of there if it becomes <br /> a problem. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the City has options already in the Code to deal with parking and noise issues. <br /> Page 3 <br />