My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-01-1972 Planning Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1972
>
05-01-1972 Planning Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/21/2023 1:45:52 PM
Creation date
2/22/2023 10:41:41 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
IIINUTES OC A KliGULAR MEETING HELD MAY 1, 1972 <br />Councilman Dorn explained what had transpired <br />at the Village Coincil meeting of April 24, <br />1972, regarding the proposed Art Fair and <br />the Large Assembly Ordinance. In his explanation, <br />116 Stated a question was brought up from the <br />floor at that meeting as to whether tne <br />Village has more control over large assemblies <br />by present ordinances than by enacting a <br />specific ordinance for that usage. <br />After a discussion on how present ordinances <br />regulate and how the proposed ordinance would <br />regulate, <br />Suarles moved, Elliott seconded, tnat <br />recommendation be made that an ordinance <br />to regulate large assemblies would not <br />oe needed. Motion, Ayes (10) - Nays (OV <br />Searles passed out the newest draft of <br />tiie Lake Minnetonka Conservation District <br />Lakeshore Policy again stating that this <br />agency, while it has powers to enact <br />legislation, in this case is only acting as <br />an improving agency. He explained that the <br />newest draft eliminated much of the <br />objection to the former drafts by eliminating <br />single family properties from the recommenda* <br />tions in the policy and concentrating on <br />commercial and multiple uses. <br />Searles gave a rundown on studies being made <br />by the Transportation Committee. <br />Included in his report were: <br />1. That they have met with the State Highway <br />Department regarding the status of new High <br />way #12. As near as can be ascertained now, <br />tite completion of this highway has been <br />reevaluated for 1980 or later. <br />2. Tnat pressure has to be taken off of <br />Highway #15 traffic by construction of <br />ringroutes to present Highways #12 and #6. <br />The roost important route being updating <br />County Road #110 and #19 to those highways. <br />The biggest block in this route would be <br />straightening County #19 where.it meets-#84, <br />wiiich would involve construction of roughly <br />one mile of new highway to connect with #12 <br />and #6. It was the opinion of the committee <br />that if no other means of funding was available, <br />it could be done with MSA funds over a two year <br />period. The project would require the assistance <br />of other benefiting municipalities. <br />Page 3 <br />LARGE ASSEIBLY ORDINANCE <br />LMCD UKESHORE POLICY <br />TRANSPORTATION STUDY <br />(Continued)
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.