My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-25-2013 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2013
>
11-25-2013 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2015 3:42:29 PM
Creation date
2/23/2015 3:42:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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,November 25,2013 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (S. #13-3616 CITY OF ORONO,ZONING CODE AMENDMENT—ALTERNATIVE ENERGY <br /> SYSTEMS, ORDINANCE NO. (TABLED), Continued) <br /> Levang stated as it relates to Page 7,Item No. 9 states that the collector and mounting system shall cover <br /> no more than 70 percent,which in her view seems like a huge amount. Levang asked how the 70 percent <br /> was determined. <br /> Gaffron stated that number likely came from other cities' codes and it was not something Staff attempted <br /> to define. <br /> Levang asked when the Planning Commission reviewed the draft ordinance whether they considered how <br /> that would impact the neighbor's view and whether any thought was given to the aesthetics of the system <br /> and the impact on someone else's view <br /> Gaffron stated the language in Item No. 10 states that all solar panels shall be designed, installed, <br /> positioned and constructed of materials so as not to cause any glare or reflective sunlight onto <br /> neighboring properties or structures,nor toward vehicular traffic on land or on a lake, and so as to not <br /> obstruct views. Reflection angles from collector surfaces shall be oriented away from neighboring <br /> windows. Where necessary, screening may be required to address glare. <br /> Gaffron indicated those standards are all addressing the potential impacts on a neighbor but not <br /> addressing necessarily the aesthetics. Gaffron stated the Planning Commission did not specifically <br /> discuss aesthetics. <br /> McMillan asked who would make the decision on whether it is causing glare or other problems. <br /> Gaffron stated that would be part of the design work and review process that would occur. Gaffron <br /> indicated the ordinance itself does not provide any specifics on who would make that determination so it <br /> would likely be up to City Staff. <br /> Mattick stated if there is glare,the City Council would need to address it,but the ordinance calls for non- <br /> reflective materials.Mattick stated other cities tend to regulate the type of materials used. <br /> Printup asked if any of the options or versions discussed by the Planning Commission ever looked at <br /> systems on a case-by-case basis and whether the City should develop a process to handle that rather than <br /> an actual ordinance. <br /> Gaffron stated if these were made a conditional use as opposed to an allowed or permitted accessory use <br /> that would be one way to guarantee review by the Planning Commission and City Council. <br /> Mattick stated that is correct,but in terms of a case-by-case basis,the City has to make sure that Property <br /> Owner A has the same rights as Property Owner B. Mattick indicated the regulations created would need <br /> to be uniform and that properties in the same zoning district would need to have the same chance at <br /> installing solar. <br /> Page 15 of 29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.