Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,March 20,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> 4. Is an adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a common boundary and no new <br /> nonconformities are created. <br /> Barnhart stated in speaking with the City Attorney,he and Staff felt comfortable with the proposed <br /> language. If the Planning Commission would like to specify that no existing nonconformities will be <br /> increased,that could be added. <br /> Schoenzeit noted that would not allow a situation where one lot is made bigger since it would increase the <br /> nonconformity even though both lots would still remain nonconforming. Schoenzeit stated the property <br /> owners would need to swap equal adjustments of land in order to not become more nonconforming under <br /> that language. <br /> Thiesse stated if the lot is already nonconforming in size,making the lot smaller would not be a new <br /> nonconformity. <br /> Leskinen questioned whether increasing the nonconformity should be treated the same as creating a new <br /> nonconformity. Leskinen stated in her opinion that is splitting hairs too much. <br /> Barnhart suggested the following language be added: "No new nonconformities are created or an existing <br /> nonconformity is increased." Barnhart stated he does not want to be in a position where he has to adjust a <br /> lot line resulting in one of the lots becoming smaller. Barnhart noted that could result in a zig-zagging of <br /> lines. <br /> Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 10:20 p.m. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 10:20 p.m. <br /> Lemke moved,Landgraver seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3923,City of <br /> Orono,Text Amendment: Subdivision Exemptions,with the additional language suggested by <br /> Staff. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. <br /> 16. 17-3924 CITY OF ORONO,TEXT AMENDMENT: REPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE <br /> PERMIT, 10:21 P.M.—10:30 P.M. <br /> Barnhart stated the City Code includes a provision that gives neighbors the authority to petition the City <br /> Council. The current language reads"Upon petition of 75 percent or more of the adjacent property <br /> owners as those whose property lies within 1000 feet of the property subject to the conditional use permit, <br /> the Council shall hold a public hearing on the continuation of the permit." <br /> The City Attorney has recommended that there is no authority in state statute to open up an existing, <br /> conforming,lawfully operating conditional use permit. The objective with the draft ordinance is to <br /> remove that section from the code because in theory it could give a resident false hope that some action <br /> could occur. As a result,the City Attorney has recommended the following language: <br /> Page 39 of 43 <br />