My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-21-1982 Planning Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1982
>
06-21-1982 Planning Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2023 10:42:05 AM
Creation date
2/15/2023 10:41:44 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
im \ <br />MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 21, 1982 Page 9 <br />Rovegno felt it did not fit in the zoning and that it <br />should at least require a conditional use permit. <br />MARTIN (CONT) <br />^)allahan stated that a formal conditional use permit should <br />be filed and a zoning amendment also. <br />Applicant stated that this improvement would greatly enhance <br />this piece of property. <br />Rovegno asked if this wasn't an accessory structure in the <br />B-1 district and if there were any restrictions on setbacks? <br />Mabusth stated that all structures must meet the same setback. <br />Another poll was teUcen from the Planning Commission as to <br />whether they thought the applicants needed a conditional use <br />permit: <br />Rovegno felt that it required a conditional use and a <br />zoning amendment. <br />Opheim concurred with Rovegno. <br />McDonald stated that they should just amend the code. <br />H2unmerel felt it was compatible with the current plan. <br />^^llahan stated that they should amend the code. <br />Goetten concurred with Callahan. <br />Kelley felt this type of use was already compatible with <br />the current zoning code. <br />Rovegno stated that they should just add it to the list <br />in the code as a compatible use and thereby requiring a <br />conditional use permit. <br />Kelley felt that the City should have as much control over tl <br />storage as possible and then when a change in ownership occui <br />it should be reviewed again. Also the City should define <br />square footage for mini-storage uses for future reference. <br />Callahan stated another suggestion would be to attach this <br />use onto the original conditional use permit (gas) rather <br />than amend the code. <br />Hammerel noted to the applicant that soil borings should <br />definitely be done because this would determine the type <br />of foundation given the spec/ial fill problems. <br />Kl. <br />Planning Commission asked the applicant if he would rather <br />have his application tabled. <br />pplicant stated that he would rather move on to the Council <br />and get started as soon as possible. <br />4.: -V V" <br />• •• .* .•* •'» .*.«.V: <br />vV/:v^’;V ^. . ... <br />/■ <br />I ■:-! <br />■ 4 <br />-i :■ ■,
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.