Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,March 18,2013 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Landgraver stated with some of the other communities that define sports courts and items like that, it <br /> appears they are broke into sporting activities or a non-sporting activity such as an entertaining facility. <br /> Landgraver stated there appears to be a distinction between those two. <br /> Curtis pointed out a sports court could also have lights and nets. <br /> Landgraver stated that is a physical sporting activity and parameters can be placed around them,but that <br /> in his view entertaining facilities perhaps do not belong in the sporting section. <br /> Gaffron stated there is probably a distinction that staff could develop between sporting and nonsporting. <br /> Berg noted the code speaks to recreational facilities,which is preriy broad based. <br /> Gaffron noted other cities' codes talk about location, lighting,fencing and other factors that could have a <br /> potential impact on the neighborhood. <br /> Berg noted other people also erect up temporary hockey rinks with lights and asked whether the City <br /> wants to regulate those. <br /> Gaffron stated this section will need some additional thought and consultation with the CiTy Attorney over <br /> how detailed the list should be. <br /> Landgraver commented that sporting activities tend to have people making some level of noise and <br /> requires a bigger area. <br /> Schoenzeit stated he would caution the City from developing such a specific list that encompasses <br /> everything and would require the person to pay a$750 fee if it is not listed. Schoenzeit stated the use of <br /> the word et cetera might avoid that. <br /> Langraver suggested creating a section regarding sporting activities and then leave it somewhat open- <br /> ended. The more entertaining/nonsport activities perhaps should be a separate category. <br /> Leskinen stated the City should be careful not to overregulate the use of a person's private property and <br /> that they want someone to be able to entertain and enjoy the use of their property. The City needs to be <br /> very cautious in how the code is worded for controlling buildings and structures and not overregulate how <br /> an individual can use their private property. <br /> Landgraver stated whatever the sporting activity or entertainment facility is, it should be at least 15 feet <br /> from the neighbor. <br /> Gaffron stated that would help establish some parameters for those uses that could potentially impact the <br /> neighbors. <br /> Leskinen indicated she is in agreement with that restriction but that she has a concern the City will get too <br /> detailed. Leskinen commented it is not what the City says but how it is interpreted. Leskinen stated how <br /> the Planning Commission understands it in the context of this conversation may not be how someone else <br /> interprets it later on. <br /> Landgraver asked if Staff is going to go back and review this section. <br /> Page 14 of 24 <br />