My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/16/2014 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
06/16/2014 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2018 11:43:27 AM
Creation date
12/21/2018 11:43:24 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,June 16,2014 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> codes should be done to determine whether they already address this in a manner acceptable to <br /> the City. <br /> 9. While the submitted site plan is recognized as conceptual in nature,this site has a history of <br /> continually evolving and the City should look forward in time to understand the potential ultimate <br /> impacts of what is allowed within the context of a B-2 subdistrict. <br /> Gaffron noted a number of concepts and concerns were brought up by the public,the Planning <br /> Commissioners, and Staff during the May 19 meeting as well as the work session related to the specific <br /> rezoning application for this site and the submitted site plan. Those items are as follows: <br /> 1. Should the 1440 property remain residentially zoned as a buffer to the neighboring property; i.e., <br /> as a transitional property. <br /> 2. By reducing the proposed parking by six stalls, a buffer of 30 feet to the residential property <br /> could be achieved. <br /> 3. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment that would necessarily accompany a rezoning from <br /> residential use to commercial use could incorporate standards and limitations for use of the site. <br /> 4. Because these two properties are and have been a hybrid of residential and commercial uses, <br /> neither the applicant nor the neighbor should expect that their future will be completely <br /> commercial or completely residential. Both parties need to be accommodated. <br /> 5. If future buildings or changes to the physical aspects of the site were proposed in the future, a <br /> commercial site plan review/approval process would be required and would need Council <br /> approval. <br /> Gaffron stated if the Planning Commission concludes that it would be appropriate to pursue the creation <br /> of a B-2 subdistrict, it would be appropriate at this time to formalize that recommendation and direct that <br /> Staff bring it to the City Council for approval to move ahead. Creation of a new zoning district is a <br /> process over which the Council has a great deal of discretion and the Planning Commission should have <br /> Council's approval before spending additional effort on this topic. <br /> Gaffron noted a letter was received from Timothy Keane, Attorney-at-Law, who represents the neighbors <br /> to the marina. <br /> Thiesse asked if the number of parking stalls being reduced is six or eight. <br /> Gaffron stated it is likely a total of eight, which leaves the back-up area. <br /> Thiesse stated the other one along the property line could also be eliminated. <br /> Lemke noted removal of that parking space would provide an additional 20 feet of buffer. <br /> Gaffron stated the whole row of parking along could be eliminated along the property line or elsewhere. <br /> Page 3 of 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.