My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-08-1997 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1997
>
12-08-1997 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2023 10:43:12 AM
Creation date
8/1/2023 10:39:02 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
444
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
; <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 <br />reviewed again in January. Van Zomeren cited the ordinance sections suggesting the text <br />amendment be extended in the B-3 zoning 250' from the commercial zone. <br />Stoddard vvithdrew his motion. <br />Jabbour indicated that this would require a 4/5th majority vote by Council and could not <br />be reviewed until December 8 when a full Council would be in attendance. <br />Stoddard moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2314 for construction of a <br />duplex amending this single lot zoning to include duplex credit approvals for construction <br />'vithin 250’ fror B-3 building due to its legal non-conforming use. <br />McMillan questioned whether the property was more than 250' from the B-3 zoning. <br />fhe number of docks (3) and their length (25') were noted. They are located adjacent to <br />the neighboring property and allows people to walk across the outlot. Stoddard noted thut <br />the motion would allow the applicant and Staff to see what can be done before review at <br />the 12/8 Council meeting. McMillan noted that LMCD approval would be required for <br />moving the docks. <br />It was noted that the language as it currently exists in the ordinance needs to be narrowed <br />and limited to the B-3. <br />Stoddard said there may be no need for an amendment as he feels the distance is less than <br />previously thought. <br />23
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.