My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-13-2013 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
05-13-2013 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/19/2015 4:05:01 PM
Creation date
2/19/2015 4:04:59 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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,May 13,2013 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (8. #13-3596 CITYOFORONO,ZONINGSTUDY—ACCESSORYUSESANDSTRUCTURES, <br /> Continued) <br /> Gaffron indicated those are the key elements to the zoning code text amendment and that he would be <br /> happy to answer any questions the Council may have. Gaffron indicated he does not expect the Council <br /> to take action on this tonight but that he hopes to have it finalized and back before the City Council by the <br /> end of May or early June. <br /> Printup asked if any residents have been hindered by the moratorium. <br /> Curtis indicated there have been several applications that have been impacted. <br /> McMillan suggested the City Council first discuss the customary and incidental language. <br /> Mattick stated it is easy to be definitive with your more intense uses, such as a conditional use permit, but <br /> when you get to accessory structures,there are a large number of things that would qualify as an <br /> accessory structure. It then becomes haxd to say to a resident that if it is not on this list, it will not be <br /> allowed. One solution to that is that a resident can come in and apply for a zoning ordinance amendment, <br /> but that would require even the smallest or most insignificant components to require a zoning ordinance <br /> amendment. <br /> Staff has attempted to list as many things as possible,but the fact still remains that you will not be able to <br /> include everything on the list,which leaves the City with one or two options. The first option is the City <br /> can say this list is all-inclusive, and if you want something that is not included on the list,the resident can <br /> come in and apply for a zoning ordinance amendment. The second option is to include the language <br /> customary and incidental to the primary use. Mattick noted that language sometimes causes some <br /> concern since there is some subjectivity to the ordinance. As long as there is a history of the structure and <br /> the Council can find grounds to justify it, it will be allowed. Mattick indicated that language is very <br /> common throughout communities. <br /> McMillan commented that typically with accessory uses,the City does not become aware of something <br /> until there is a complaint. <br /> Gaffron stated a wood pile next to the neighbor's fence would be an example. <br /> McMillan stated she is wrestling with those types of situations because they happen in everyday life and <br /> tend not to cause problems the vast majority of the time. <br /> Mattick stated he is not sure how the City would regulate some of that. <br /> Printup asked if the City is looking for more regulation with the list. <br /> Mattick indicated the list clarifies what the City allows, and while Staff has added things to the list and it <br /> could appear to be more regulation, it actually allows more things. <br /> Printup asked if Orono is going down the path of creating lists and whether someday they could be tested <br /> by having to define the list. <br /> Page 10 of 26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.