Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, April 11, 2016 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 24 of 32 <br /> <br />15. #15-3784 TEXT AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO LIGHTING REGULATIONS, <br />NUISANCES (continued) <br /> <br />Walsh stated it is important that the ordinance is able to be enforced. <br /> <br />Mattick stated the nuisance portion is simpler and the zoning component is more complex. Mattick asked <br />whether the Council would like to keep the two tied together when Staff brings it back before the Council <br />or whether they would prefer to review them separately. <br /> <br />Walsh stated the nuisance one is probably the more important one but that it needs to be more specific. <br />Walsh stated as an example, the word glare should be defined. <br /> <br />Barnhart stated defining something specific is the challenge and that Staff was not able to find a model <br />ordinance that was more specific. Barnhart stated from a measuring standpoint, it is easier to define what <br />that means. Barnhart indicated Staff looked at a number of ordinances and they usually did not go into a <br />great deal amount of detail and dealt mostly with commercial or industrial. Barnhart stated there is no <br />pressing need to pass it and that the Council can review it later. <br /> <br />Cornick stated he would like the Council to deal with it as two separate issues. <br /> <br />Mattick stated it would be easier to work with the nuisance portion first. <br /> <br />Levang asked City Attorney Mattick if he would ever recommend something that is indefensible. <br /> <br />Mattick stated he would not, but that there are always issues that are not contemplated whenever new <br />regulations are passed. Mattick stated in his view the nuisance section can be made to a defensible level. <br /> <br />McMillan asked if there are examples of other cities using the 0.1 foot candle and having defended it in <br />court. <br /> <br />Mattick stated the citation could also be made a petty misdemeanor, which would carry a maximum fine <br />of $300. Mattick indicated he was speaking with some people who do code enforcement of lighting and <br />that one of the first things they need to do is to convince the judge that the equipment they are using is <br />acceptable. Mattick stated to his knowledge no one has really gone to trial on this type of issue and that <br />typically a letter is sent to the property owner and the person fixes it. <br /> <br />Levang moved, Printup seconded, to table Application No. 15-3784, Text Amendment Pertaining to <br />Lighting Regulations, Nuisances. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br /> <br />16. #15-3759 CITY OF ORONO TEXT AMENDMENT – SHORT-TERM (VACATION) <br />RENTALS <br /> <br />Barnhart noted the City Council reviewed this item last month and then directed Staff to research what <br />other cities have done to address short-term rentals. Barnhart indicated he contacted ten area cities and <br />only two have a vacation rental ordinance. Those findings are summarized in Staff’s report. Greenwood <br />recently established a 30-day minimum standard. The majority of them are not specific to short-term <br />rentals.