Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, December 10, 2012 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />  <br />  Page 8 of 15    <br />   <br />(13. #12-3586 CITY OF ORONO – AMEND ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-394, 78-419, 78-443, <br />AND 78-566, Continued) <br /> <br />applies for a conditional use permit for an accessory use, there are certain standards that must be met. <br />Gaffron indicated that when it is listed as an accessory use, you do not need to apply for a conditional use <br />permit. This text amendment is changing the language to what it was originally intended to state so that <br />rural residential districts do not require a conditional use permit for their accessory use of farm animals. <br /> <br />The other portion of the proposed text amendment deals with Ordinance No. 90, which added gardens to <br />the list of permitted residential uses in December of 2011. There was a reference that was inadvertently <br />not changed in Section 78-566, which this text amendment is intended to correct. <br /> <br />McMillan asked when horses are stabled and the property does not have the required acreage, why a <br />conditional use permit is not required. McMillan indicated she does not understand the language “at the <br />Council’s discretion” in that section. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated at the bottom of Page 2 of the Planning Commission memo, what it is proposed to state is <br />the following: “For the keeping of horses, there must be at least one acre for dwelling and two acres of <br />open pasture for the first horse. For the keeping of more than one horse, the property must have one <br />additional acre of open pasture for each additional horse.” Gaffron indicated those are requirements <br />regardless of whether or not the property owner is looking for a conditional use permit. <br /> <br />As it relates to the language “calculations of minimum pasture acreage shall not include any land defined <br />as a wetland or wetland buffer under Section 78-1602,” that is also a requirement that must be kept. <br />In the case of the language that states, “when horses are kept stabled and do not require pasture for feed <br />purposes, the minimum pasture requirement may be adjusted at the discretion of the Council,” that would <br />deal with a situation where the City Council would have in front of them a request for a waiver of the <br />required acreage for pasture. In that situation it may not necessarily come before the City Council as a <br />conditional use permit. <br /> <br />Gaffron indicated if the City Council would like to make that a conditional use, Staff would have to add <br />language in a different section making it a conditional use permit and then bring it back before the <br />Council in January. Gaffron noted there is not a specific mechanism in the current code that says it <br />should be a conditional use permit but it can be made one. <br /> <br />Bremer asked what the request would be if it is not a conditional use permit. <br /> <br />City Attorney Mattick indicated he has not reviewed the text amendment in depth but the language that <br />caught his attention was the minimum pasture requirement may be adjusted at the discretion of the City <br />Council. Mattick stated in that type of situation he would typically look at what the standard is for review <br />as it relates to a conditional use permit. <br /> <br />Gaffron noted the language “at the discretion of the Council” has been in the code for a number of years <br />but that it could be changed to make it a defined process. <br /> <br />Bremer commented she is not sure what would be considered to even be at the Council’s discretion. <br /> <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/14/2013 <br />Approval of Council Minutes 12/10/2012 [Page 8 of 15]