Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OP A REGUUR MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 7, 1972 Page Z <br />prescribed to it. Mr. Lee, attorney for the <br />opposition, asked that those within 300* of <br />the canp be allowed to speak, i^oisson <br />read the list including: L. Butterfield, <br />Dorn, Kostka, Child, D, Stubbs, Kirsch, <br />and Oslund. <br />The following voiced opposition on these <br />grounds: <br />Ilrs. Koska - An operation like this would <br />be noisy. <br />- moved out to Orono for peace <br />This usage would violate this <br />ir. Kokesh <br />and quiet, <br />privilege. <br />Searles stated that a subjective judgment <br />w.-tuld be necessary to determine how the <br />distance to adjacent properties and the <br />number of children using the subject property <br />could inhibit or cause loss of valuation in <br />these properties. <br />Gasch stated she did not believe the lot wide <br />enough for a campsite. <br />Mesdames Petersen and Carruthers voiced <br />opposition to the camp on the grounds it <br />would increase traffic. Mr. Dunham said <br />that there would be no more traffic tJ:an <br />that engendered on school days during the <br />school season. <br />Mr. Stubbs was of the opinion that if <br />Orono wanted day camps, areas sliould be <br />designated in the zoning for this type of <br />usage. <br />Attorney Lee stated he questioned the <br />legality of the perisit feeling that there <br />were no provisions in the code. Section <br />34.023, to allow for this usago. Searles <br />said tiiat there were provisions for camps, <br />and this usage was similar to others listed <br />in the code. <br />Searles moved, Ryerse seconded, that the <br />Planning Commission recommend standards <br />that would make regulatory the number of <br />children allowed according to the size of <br />an area and also regulations regarding the <br />distance an adjacent property should be <br />from the focal point of the camp. Thus <br />future applications would have guidelines <br />to work on. Motion failed. <br />TheKullberg moved that permit be denied, <br />reason lor the motion being basically <br />the large number of children using the <br />facility. Also to be taken into consideration <br />that the majority of people in the area do not <br />favor a camp, the camp would engender traffic <br />PUBLIC HEARING <br />(Continued) <br />problems and could cause property devaluation. <br />Motion died for lack of a second. (Continued)