Laserfiche WebLink
p-is- <br />' i <br />> <br />m <br />f' • ’ . <br />0 <br />4.5K.»-f <br />sL <br />MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MFETING <br />SEPTEMBER 18,2000 <br />for the liquor store. The Applicant also disclosed that the purchase of the building was <br />contingent upon approval of that option. At the time the building permit was issued, the <br />conditional use permit was not raised. <br />Anderst stated he was not notified he needed a conditional use ,>ermit until the time the <br />footings were inspected. Anderst stated the building inspector missed the fact that,footings were <br />being poured at the time the building permit was issued. <br />Kluth inquired when the const*, action was completed. <br />Johnson stated the Applicant appeared before the City Council in July regarding this matter. <br />iith the City Council permitting continuation of the construction at that time. <br />Stoddard moved to recommend approval of Application #2604, Narrows Saloon, <br />3380 Shoreline Drive, subject to no further expansion to the business. MOTION DIED <br />DUE TO LACK OF SECOND. <br />Smith stated it would be her understanding the Applicant would need to come back before the <br />Planning Commission and City Council if he wished to expand his business further, and at that <br />point the City would act on his application. <br />Hawn stated the Applicant needs to address certain conditions prior to approval. <br />Gaffron stated the Planning Commission has wide latitude in the placing of restrictions on this <br />business to protect the character of the neighborhood and business climate which abuts a <br />residential neighborhood. <br />Hawn inquired whether the si' r of the business could be limited. <br />Gaffn n stated the Planning Commission could restrict the size of the business as part of the <br />conditional use permit, but that a future City Council or Planning Commission may eiect to <br />change that. <br />PAGE 30