Laserfiche WebLink
, MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Tuesday,May 28,2013 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (3. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO—ACCESSORY USES AND STR UCTURES—ZONING <br /> ORDINANCEAMENDMENT, Continued) <br /> Mattick stated the Planning Commission did spend a lot of time on the ordinance and attempted to <br /> determine which items the City sees more often, such as sport courts,and it would make sense from that <br /> aspect. Mattick indicated he has been attempting to work with Staff to develop a way to make it a little <br /> more generic rather than spelling it out as a tennis court or a sport court. Mattick stated in his view it is <br /> workable as it is but that he is more inclined to combine the two and that he does not see a strong reason <br /> to distinguish between them. Mattick indicated he understands they are different to some degree but from <br /> a functional standpoint they are very much the same. Mattick stated he would probably combine them <br /> and perhaps refine what is listed a little bit more. <br /> Mattick noted the section on detached accessory buildings and detached accessory structures will need to <br /> be reworked. The reason that was included is buildings and structures are two defined terms and are <br /> rather broad. The proposed language does not accomplish what the City would like to accomplish and <br /> will need to be reworked. <br /> McMillan indicated she is in agreement that it is too broad. McMillan noted that the City Attorney had <br /> raised the point that it is redundant to say detached accessory buildings since all accessory buildings, by <br /> definition, are detached. <br /> Mattick stated accessory structures are supposed to be detached. <br /> McMillan stated she likes detached private garage since it differentiates between the one that is attached <br /> to a person's house. <br /> Bremer asked why it says private. <br /> Gaffron stated historically in the code it talks about private simply to differentiate between someone who <br /> might put in a facility that is used for commercial purposes. <br /> Mattick indicated it is a defined term, and once you change it in this ordinance,you will have to change it <br /> elsewhere. <br /> McMillan indicated she is also fine with combining the two listings for private recreational sporting <br /> facilities and private recreational play facilities. <br /> Anderson asked if the detached accessory structure is more of a generic term than detached accessory <br /> building so you can put recreational sports and recreational play under that particular subheading. <br /> Mattick stated that was the idea but in his opinion it needs to be reworked since it is too broad. If you <br /> truly look at the definition of a structure,just about everything can be defined as a structure. Mattick <br /> stated in his view the language goes too far and will allow things that the City does not want. <br /> McMillan asked if everyone is okay with the word temporary for roadside stands. <br /> It was the consensus of the City Council that the word temporary is acceptable. <br /> Page 7 of 18 � _ __ <br />