My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-25-2016 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2016
>
04-25-2016 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/30/2016 8:20:53 AM
Creation date
9/30/2016 8:13:59 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
356
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, April 11, 2016 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 29 of 32 <br /> <br />16. #15-3759 CITY OF ORONO TEXT AMENDMENT – SHORT-TERM (VACATION) <br />RENTALS (continued) <br />Mattick stated the City does not need to inspect the buildings or conduct background checks. The <br />impetus behind the ordinance was that some lakeshore owners expressed concern about different people <br />renting out a house in their neighborhood for a weekend at a time. If the home is not owner-occupied, the <br />City wants to know who to contact in the event problems come up. Mattick stated the City can choose to <br />place further conditions on the property owner if it chooses. <br /> <br />Mattick stated the question currently before the courts is what the City can inspect on a residential <br />property. One of the arguments is that since there is not an open building permit, the City cannot require <br />a lot of those updates. <br /> <br />Walsh stated it is similar to a home occupation in that the City is not approving the business or the people <br />who come to the home. Walsh stated it might be good to have some language in the ordinance that says <br />the City is not endorsing this business or property. <br /> <br />McMillan noted the neighbors will not have a lot of say in the business license process and that she will <br />need to see the business license form to comment further. McMillan stated she also does not feel that <br />someone should pay $50 simply to provide some contact information. McMillan stated when the owners <br />are onsite, it typically is not a problem. <br /> <br />Mattick stated as long as the person meets the criteria for the license, there is no opportunity for the <br />neighbors to come in and comment on it. Mattick stated unless the person violates the terms of the <br />license, there really is nothing the City can do. <br /> <br />Walsh stated right now they can do anything they want. <br /> <br />McMillan stated she is aware of some issues and that the letter the City sent last year helped to some <br />extent but it did not solve everything. <br /> <br />Walsh stated he is not aware of any huge problems. <br />Barnhart stated the Council could elect to table it tonight and that Staff will continue to collect <br />information over the summer. Barnhart stated if there are complaints, Staff could send another letter to <br />the known properties. Barnhart stated the Council could perhaps look at it again in the fall. <br /> <br />McMillan stated another article in the newsletter on short-term rentals would be helpful. <br /> <br />Walsh stated having the discussion is helping to make people aware of the situation and the issues. <br /> <br />Carter suggested the City keep statistics on short-term rentals and long-term rentals separate. <br /> <br />McMillan stated she also would like to enclose a public notice in the newsletter if the Council has another <br />public hearing on this item. <br /> <br />Knutson noted the situation described by Jeanne Carter is not what he is talking about. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.