Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, June 16, 2014 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />Page 4 of 18  <br />  <br />Schoenzeit asked whether any zoning change from residential to commercial is always accompanied by a <br />Comprehensive Plan Amendment and which would happen first. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated technically the Comprehensive Plan Amendment should precede the rezoning. In this case <br />a Comprehensive Plan Amendment was not initially applied for but it is clear that the City cannot take <br />any action on the rezoning until or at least there is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment happening at the <br />same time. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit asked what became broken in this situation that caused it to require fixing now. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated there are a couple of reasons that it is not logical to continue with the existing situation. <br />One of them has to do with dock locations and the fact that in order to make docks more conforming with <br />LMCD code, the setbacks would need to be complied with and the rezoning would help that situation. <br /> <br />The second factor is if you look at what exists on the site, there is a building in very poor condition and an <br />existing residence that is currently being rented out. Both of those buildings are limited in how they can <br />be used residentially due to the parking agreement that is in effect that utilizes all the parking for the <br />residences. Gaffron stated the ability to make some positive changes to the site based on the rezoning is <br />something that would be useful to both the applicant and the City as well as perhaps the neighborhood by <br />reducing the number of access points to County Road 15 to one location. Circulation on the site is also <br />poor and forces any commercial use of the residential sites to maneuver by using a number of backing <br />movements. In addition, there are no clearly defined limits from a practical perspective on how many <br />cars can fit into that area. Gaffron stated the only way to get 26 cars in that area is to double stack the <br />parking, which would require a person to be on staff full-time. <br /> <br />Gaffron indicated the ability to require some stormwater management for the gravel parking area would <br />also come along with a rezoning and that currently the City does not have an easy way to require some of <br />those changes. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit asked if all the activities that are currently taking place on the property have been <br />grandfathered in. <br /> <br />Gaffron indicated that is correct and that it then becomes a question of whether the activities have truly <br />been grandfathered in and whether the use has changed. Gaffron noted the activities have been an issue <br />for the neighbor and that changing the layout creates the opportunity to eliminate some of the past uses. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit stated what he is hearing is that the best way for the City to gain some concessions is under <br />the zoning change. <br /> <br />Gaffron indicated that is correct. <br /> <br />Leskinen asked if the possibility of a residential subdistrict is a viable solution. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated there are a number of obstacles to a residential subdistrict as well as a commercial <br />subdistrict. Gaffron indicated Staff has not given a residential subdistrict a lot of thought but that he <br />would prefer not to create a residential subdistrictfor properties that have been used commercially. <br /> <br />Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 6:56 p.m. <br />Item #03 - PC Agenda - 07/21/2014 <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 06/16/14 [Page 4 of 18]