Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,March 20,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> above and might include additional parameters that the City desires. This section would be <br /> similar to the City code sections that provide required findings for variances and CUPs. <br /> 2. The RR-1B zoning district should be amended to include a section entitled"Interim Uses". This <br /> would presumably list just the use now being requested, such as"Construction staging,materials <br /> and equipment storage, and materials recycling." <br /> 3. The listing could/should include a number of conditions that must be met in order to be approved. <br /> Those conditions might include,for instance,the following: <br /> -A minimum separation distance from nearby residential structures or lot lines; <br /> -Minimum lot size; <br /> -Requirements for site and adjacent road maintenance and traffic control measures; <br /> -Allowed only for government sponsored public improvement projects; <br /> -The Council must have the ability to deny an interim use even though it is listed for a specific <br /> zoning district. Item 4 of the statute excerpt would presumably allow the City to find that <br /> appropriate conditions cannot or will not be met and that becomes a basis for denial. <br /> The Planning Commission should consider whether there are any additional conditions that would be <br /> appropriate for this use. <br /> Gaffron stated one of the questions that came up is whether the zoning is consistent with the <br /> Comprehensive Plan for interim use. An interim use that might be appropriate on a temporary basis <br /> might not fit within the type of uses for which a property is guided in the Comprehensive Plan. If an <br /> interim industrial-type use is allowed in the zoning code as an interim use in an area guided for residential <br /> use,does that meet the standard for being in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Attorney <br /> has indicated that because zoning needs to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,the <br /> Comprehensive Plan technically should be amended to allow interim uses that are not conforming with <br /> the guiding. Gaffron noted there will be some text amendments that potentially will be added to the <br /> Comprehensive Plan during its 2018 update but Staff does not believe that should stop the City's ability <br /> to add interim uses to the zoning code at this time. <br /> The Planning Commission should consider the issues for consideration outlined in Staff's report. If the <br /> Planning Commission feels that interim uses is a tool the City should have in place, a recommendation of <br /> approval would be appropriate. <br /> Gaffron noted with the next application the Planning Commission will be looking at the exact use that is <br /> being proposed by the applicant. <br /> Schoenzeit asked whether the conditions should include language that the interim use or the specific use <br /> requires some type of bond in the event the interim property owner does not clean the lot when they are <br /> finished with the interim use. <br /> Gaffron indicated he does not disagree with that suggestion. <br /> Leskinen noted City had considerable discussion on interim uses a number of years ago and that to her <br /> recollection there were some pitfalls involved with interim uses. Leskinen indicated she cannot <br /> remember what those pitfalls were but that she has always felt it would be a useful tool. <br /> Page 7 of 43 <br />