12/10/2012 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,December 10,2012 6:30 o'clock p.m: (13. #I2-3586 CITY OF ORONO—AMEND ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-394, 78-419, 78-443, AND 78-566, Continued) applies for a conditional use permit for an accessory use,there are certa.in standards that must be met. Gaffron indicated that when it is listed as an accessory use,you do not need to apply for a conditional use permit. This text amendment is changing the language to what it was originally intended to state so that rural residential districts do not require a conditional use permit for their accessory use of farm animals. The other portion of the proposed text amendment deals with Ordinance No. 90,which added gardens to the list of permitted residential uses in December of 2011. There was a reference that was inadvertently not changed in Section 78-566,which this text amendment is intended to correct. McMillan asked when horses are stabled and the property does not have the required acreage,why a conditional use permit is not required. McMillan indicated she does not understand the language"at the Council's discretion"in that section. Gaffron stated at the bottom of Page 2 of the Planning Commission memo,what it is proposed to state is the following: "For the keeping of horses,there must be at least one acre for dwelling and two acres of open pasture for the first horse. For the keeping of more than one horse,the property must have one additional acre of open pasture for each additional horse." Gaffron indicated those are requirements regardless of whether or not the property owner is looking for a conditional use permit. As it relates to the language"calculations of minimum pasture acreage shall not include any land defined as a wetland or wetland buffer under Section 78-1602,"that is also a requirement that must be kept. In the case of the language that states,"when horses are kept stabled and do not require pasture for feed purposes,the minimum pasture requirement may be adjusted at the discretion of the Council,"that would deal with a situation where the City Council would have in front of them a request for a waiver of the required acreage for pasture. In that situation it may not necessarily come before the City Council as a conditional use permit. Gaffron indicated if the City Council would like to make that a conditional use, Staff would have to add language in a different section making it a conditional use permit and then bring it back before the Council in January. Gaffron noted there is not a specific mechanism in the current code that says it should be a conditional use permit but it can be made one. Bremer asked what the request would be if it is not a conditional use permit. City Attorney Mattick indicated he has not reviewed the text amendment in depth but the language that caught his attention was the minimum pasture requirement may be adjusted at the discretion of the City Council. Mattick stated in that type of situation he would typically look at what the standard is for review as it relates to a conditional use permit. Gaffron noted the language"at the discretion of the Council"has been in the code for a number of years but that it could be changed to make it a defined process. Bremer commented she is not sure what would be considered to even be at the Council's discretion. -- ---------------- ---- ------ Page 8 of 15 ----- - ---- ------ -- - - -------- ---