My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-23-1980 Planning Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1980
>
06-23-1980 Planning Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2023 12:17:03 PM
Creation date
2/15/2023 12:16:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
r <br />o <br />MINUTES OF h PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 23, 1980 > PAGE 7 <br />Mr. and Mrs. Ward were present.^ Planning Coimnission <br />gave conceptual approval. A labile Information <br />Meeting has been scheduled for July 21, 1980. <br />Mr. and Mrs. Wisegarver were present with their <br />designer Gordon Metcalf. Planning Commission <br />noted for the record that the operation at one <br />time involved both residential and commercial <br />and now exists only as commercial. Planning <br />Commission questioned whether the greenhouse, <br />construction of proposed addition and meat <br />department were an intensification of use. <br />Wisegarver noted that the greenhouse already <br />existed and a meat department could be located <br />within the present structure and should fall <br />under the original conditional use permit. <br />It was the concensus of the Commission that <br />rezoning was not a realistic solution. It had <br />to be done through an interpretation of the non <br />conforming use sections of the code. <br />McDonald felt a comparison should be done to <br />determine if this use is more of a burden to <br />the septic system than a residential unit would <br />be. <br />If the addition was approved, the hill to the <br />east of the building would have to be removed <br />for parking. <br />Planning Commission contended that non»conforming <br />structures can be enlarged if uses are not <br />intensified. Wilson noted at this time that the <br />information of the Minnesota Supreme Court decision <br />stated that this would be an intensification of <br />a non~conforming use. <br />Applicant was not present. Jabbour moved to table <br />the application until the applicant can be present. <br />Motion seconded by Hannah. Vote; Ayes (7), <br />Nays (0). Motion passed unanimously. <br />STEPHEN WARD <br />4695 No. Shore Drive <br />SUBDIVISION <br />Work Session <br />(#563) <br />KELLERS MARKET <br />3800 viayzata Blvd. <br />VARIANCE & CONDITIONAL <br />USE PERMIT <br />Work Session <br />(#561) <br />•■wi <br />\ -vr* h ■ <br />■■■ . <br />• • *•! <br />% •* ^ ' <br />m . . . <br />DARYLE UPHOFF <br />2497/2499 6 <br />2501/2503 Kelly Ave. <br />SUBDIVISION <br />Sketch Plan Review <br />(#568)
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.