My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-17-1990 Planning Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
09-17-1990 Planning Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2023 9:56:11 AM
Creation date
12/1/2022 11:28:05 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 <br />ZONING FILE #1588-U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED <br />Bellows added, "This is a conunercial operation. It is not <br />public service orientated. I am also concerned with the fact <br />that the tower will be visible. People who live in Orono <br />appreciate the rural character. If you were proposing to combine <br />the tower with an existing structure, such as a water tower, <br />there may be less opposition. You are proposing to inject into a <br />residential neighborhood a very large and visible commercial <br />structure. That is exactly the type of scenario we try to avoid <br />in this City." <br />Mr. Uban replied, "Public service does not mean just gas and <br />electricity. It involves all types of utilities including <br />communication. You cannot ignore your Ordinances in that <br />respect. This is clearly within that definition. When talking <br />about public services as a business, all utilities charge for <br />their service. If you do not pay, you do not receive the <br />service. There is no difference here." <br />Rowlette said, "There are a lot of people in Orono that have <br />Cellular phones. We may not be serving 100% of Orono residents, <br />but we are serving a large number." <br />Hanson agreed with Rowlette and added, "I believe that <br />Cellular phones do fall under the category of public service." <br />Moos said, "I concur with Maureen. This is a commercial use <br />in a residential area. I believe there are other alternatives." <br />Johnson agreed with Hanson. He said, "The church and <br />daycare center are Conditional Uses, as are the Ham radio towers <br />on private property. I do not see any distinction between those. <br />I do not believe this will have a large commercial impact on the <br />area. <br />Cohen said, "I am having difficulty with the location. I <br />believe there may be a need for the service, but don't believe it <br />has to be that tower installed in that location." <br />Johnson said, "I would be inclined to favor this more than <br />structures that have been approved for other utilities. Those <br />structures are generally constructed on substandard lots and do <br />not meet any requirements. Placing the tower on the church <br />property may mean that the site will be maintained." <br />Hanson questioned whether it would be possible to combine <br />the tower with an existing Ham radio tower in the same <br />approximate location. <br />Mr. Hellerman stated that the location of the nearest Ham <br />radio tower is in the middle of residential housing. <br />- 12 - <br />Mm
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.