Laserfiche WebLink
icept <br />af <br />cy <br />ake, <br />[>£ the <br />P <br />12805 <br />the <br />uide <br />ub- <br />e <br />prevloufl <br />from <br />it, <br />riving <br />e <br />Plain- <br />acts <br />n of <br />ote <br />pham <br />rm <br />de <br />c Plan? <br />e the <br />tnmis- <br />d <br />ed to <br />Plan. <br />A.The staff was increased to include a professional <br />planner, a new city administrator conversant in land use planning, <br />and a full time planning clerk. The city had already spent approx <br />imately $20,000 in the preparation of the data for council and <br />planning commission review. The council and planning commission <br />concluded also that from their constant public contacts, the <br />reports and studies from various other states and local agencies, <br />and from their knowledge of the services available to the city <br />in land use planning trom those agencies, that the new staff, <br />planning commission and council were able to use the raw data <br />prepared by planning commission and Brauer & Associates, Inc. to <br />complete the final guide plans. <br />* 6. Give the dates and places of all public hearing held by <br />the Council and Commission in regard to both the adoption of the <br />Guide Plan, and the amended zoning ordinance, which changed the <br />zoning classification of the plaintiffs from commercial to resi­ <br />dential. Attach all minutes of all such meetings. <br />A.See answer to interrogatory number 1.•(I <br />ii <br />7.State the form, time and manner of publication of any <br />and all notices of those public meetings mentioned in Paragraph 6 <br />supra and the name of the publication printing such notices. Attach <br />copies of such notices and proof of publication. <br />A.See answer to interrogatory number 1. <br />8.State whether or not any member of the Planning Commis­ <br />sion, Council or city administrative staff owned property in the <br />Navarre area which was down-zoned from commercial to residential. <br />(a)If there is any such individual or individuals, state <br />the full name, address, dates of service on the Commission or <br />Council or employment and address and legal description of that <br />property which he or they owned which was so down-zoned. <br />A.No. <br />9.State whether it is true that in 1971 the properties <br />owned by plaintiffs were assessed subject to an assessment deter­ <br />mined on the basis of one lateral unit per half acre. <br />(a)If so, state why such half acre denominations were <br />employed instead of, say, 1/4 acre or 1 acre denominations. <br />A.The question is unintelligible. City states that all <br />properties were assessed a lateral assessment of $8 per running <br />foot. In addition, all vacant property was assessed on the basis <br />of one unit charge per half acre. If the property were developed, <br />there was one unit charge per property regardless of size. <br />10.State the reasons that Ronnie's Dry Cleaners was not <br />do;^m-zoned from commercial to residential. <br />(a)State whether it is true that Orono officials or <br />Commission or Council members at some time planned to dov;n-zons <br />Ronnie's Dry Cleaners to residential, and if so, state v/hy the <br />plan was changed. <br />A.See answer to interrogatory number 1. <br />-3-