Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING CONIlVIISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 21,2012 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Anderson stated Planner Gaffron has seen a number of marina operations that have gone by the wayside <br /> and the issues that are created as part of a marina operation. Anderson indicated he does not have a <br /> problem with Item No. 3. <br /> Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. � <br /> Levang asked what area the 1,000 feet would encompass. <br /> Mattick indicated it would be a circle around the property. <br /> Schoenzeit commented it appears that Item No. 3 is the most acceptable and that the 72 hours will <br /> encompass the weekend. <br /> Leskinen noted the 72 hours is also consistent with the code language regulating RVs. Leskinen stated <br /> that provision would prohibit the docking of non-owner boats for the entire summer. <br /> Levang stated some of the issues raised previously during the public comment were on street parking and <br /> noise,which should be addressed. Levang questioned how this text amendment would solve the problem <br /> with on-street parking. <br /> Landgraver stated if it is a neighbor that lives within 1,000 feet,they likely will not be driving to the <br /> location,and that the people who stay for 72 hours would likely be coming by boat and would not cause <br /> an issue with parking. <br /> Levang commented there could also be situations where the person drives to the property. Levang stated <br /> there should be language in the text amendment that requires the property owner to provide off street <br /> parking. <br /> Mattick asked if the streets are already marked no parking. <br /> Levang indicated some of the streets are marked no parking on one side of the street. <br /> Gaffron stated parking may be an issue in one neighborhood and not an issue in another neighborhood. <br /> Gaffron stated in his view 1,000 feet is too far and may prompt people to drive there since it is too long of <br /> a distance for people to carry things. <br /> Levang commented they could go to an allowed place to park or the properly owner would have to <br /> provide parking on their property. <br /> Gaffron commented that allowed parking could be in front of someone else's property. <br /> Mattick stated it would be necessary to post the areas where parking will not be allowed. <br /> Schoenzeit stated parking restrictions would control use of the property. <br /> Levang indicated her point is since parking has been an issue in the past,that the text amendment should <br /> have language that prohibits the use of parking on the street. Levang stated if the dock is being used by <br /> Page 4 <br />