My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-16-1984 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1984
>
04-16-1984 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/26/2023 4:07:26 PM
Creation date
6/22/2023 4:27:20 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
120
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
, it will provide <br />signage, there <br />used as conunercial* <br />Limit signage to <br />by staff. I <br />raffic directional <br />sched to split-rail <br />B closed-off. This <br />3 but more as a <br />Lire. <br />interior commercial <br />for seasonal sales <br />on the east side <br />quarters <br />would limit <br />ms in the nearby <br />f the sales end of <br />it is located on <br />with overall <br />to parking lot. <br />isfy all accessory <br />fety hazards in <br />.m'--‘4 <br />s the request to <br />and as a work area, <br />used the apartment <br />sued a Certificate <br />t the following <br />the residential <br />iew of the Wisegarver <br />orage, employee <br />vestige of <br />the intensification <br />ly identify the <br />#826 - Lowell Sc... per & Glenn Nellist <br />April 13, 1984 <br />Page 3 <br />The applicants contend the old ®ould neverL^'useras^Mles <br />plln^fthfpropose?TnL?Lr nK>difiiation if Planning Co^nission approves <br />airinteSor modification prior to Council meeting. <br />r^»view the performance standards or guidelines <br />?inon?coX:?nrusfs"(SertiriS.03^ Subdivision 5 A through d) before <br />acting on current application. <br />Issues for discussion: <br />1. <br />■ (H) <br />staff views the removal of the npnttn«nt issue S^dificltions <br />to approval of .a =traignt forward application^^ <br />do not result in an intensifica fact I aaree with applicant the <br />ex?er?orVuft^^^ eiuTllot for aA easier residential conversion in <br />the future if the case should arise. <br />a) Are the reasons for removal of the apartment stated by the applicant <br />valid? <br />If applicant removes an outdoor sales use? dLs this reflect <br />use of apartment area ^n use’ ^If this is considered a <br />an intensification of use. intense’ less of a burden on <br />^s^tfc t?s?e^? ^?efuct?r?i^ri^^ residential unit <br />remain, although unused? <br />CONSTRUCl <br />CONDITIO^ <br />by LOWELL <br />We p <br />market bu <br />and relat <br />to offer <br />wm <br />The <br />part of t <br />$100,000 <br />is design( <br />keeping d< <br />We will ui <br />In the mai <br />through t1 <br />We w: <br />areas to t <br />We b( <br />must have <br />to remodel <br />and attrac <br />a relative <br />the produc <br />intend for <br />store. <br />Folio <br />details of <br />m
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.