My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-10-1990 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
09-10-1990 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2019 12:27:30 PM
Creation date
4/23/2019 12:27:29 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 <br />LMCD REPORT CONTINUED <br />the way that she will vote and what she will present to the LP4CD. • <br />Hurr replied, "That is correct." <br />Callahan asked whether the LMCD budget had been voted on, <br />and if so, how JoEllen had voted. <br />Hurr replied, "The budget was voted on and I abstained." <br />PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: <br />Planning Commission Representative Moos was present but had <br />no comments at this time. <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS: None <br />ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: <br />#1334 REBERS CONSTRUCTION - SUGARWOODS PLAT <br />RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONS OF PRD APPROVAL <br />Bernhardson explained what it is that the applicant is <br />asking Council to reconsider and why (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo <br />dated August 9, 1990). He stated that the Planning Commission <br />had recommended that each driveway that did not meet the standard <br />20' width allowed, be reviewed individually rather than giving a <br />blanket approval. Bernhardson said, "The proponent was hoping <br />that it would not be necessary to bring each situation before the • <br />City. The City Engineer has provided us with sketches of <br />possible driveway configurations that the City might approve. <br />The proposal is that staff would determine if there is a hardship <br />for an extraordinary driveway in the 50' setback area. If a true <br />hardship is demonstrated the applicant could choose one of the <br />options provided by the City Engineer. If the applicant does not <br />wish to use any of the options, then it would be necessary to <br />appear before the Planning Commission." <br />Callahan asked whether the plan being presented this evening <br />had been presented to the Planning Commission for their review. <br />P4abusth replied, "It went to the Planning Commission. They <br />have given their opinion which is that they prefer to review each <br />case. They are opposed to deviating from what had been approved <br />in the PRD resolution." <br />Callahan asked, "So the consensus of the Planning Commission <br />was arrived at after hearing of staff's suggestions ?" <br />Mabusth replied, "No, this specific resolution has not gone <br />to the full Planning Commission. Maureen Bellows reviewed the <br />resolution and had some comments when she appeared as the <br />Planning Representative at the August 13th Council Meeting. The <br />information was also sent to Charlie Kelley for his comment, <br />- 8 - • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.