Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 20, 1996 <br />(#2 Proposed Zoning Amendment - Continued) <br />Smith asked if the Commission could agree to the use with performance standards set at a <br />later time for this particular use or for the school itself She questioned whether both need <br />to be done at this time. Lindquist said he did not conceptually disagree with that <br />suggestion. Engebretson agreed that t^*** association saw the amendment to the code and <br />the review of the plan and approval as separate issues <br />Schroeder said the Commission is unable to accommodate the timing necessary for the <br />hockey association but added that the Commission would try to be responsive. He noted <br />the need for a full discussion of the project itself but felt the issue should probably be <br />tabled at this time Schroeder said he would like to see a work session scheduled with the <br />school, the boosters, and the neighbors to discuss a conditional use permit for a hockey <br />arena with a non-profit organization. <br />Mabusth asked about the amendment itself and w hat performance standards are needed in <br />the code amendment before adding specifics in the conditional use permit itself <br />Schroeder said he was not sure w here the optimal placement of such an arena should be <br />Lindquist said he needs to know what the school officially would like to see be done. <br />Schroeder agreed. <br />Hawn asked if there was agreement on any of the pieces laid before the Commission <br />regarding the amendment itself She asked if they agreed in principal on including the ice <br />arena, tennis facility, field, house and gymnasium as Indoor Sports Facilities, noting that <br />the conditional use permit would take care of the specifics She asked whether the <br />Commissioners approved conceptually of an ice arena in the same parcel as the school. <br />Hawn noted that in the future there may be the need to find additional non-contiguous <br />land for such facilities and would the Commission want to be that restrictive in the <br />piacement <br />Grabek interjected at this point that he saw Smith as being inconsistent as she was not <br />requiring seeing specific details on this issue but did so on another application He then <br />informed I lawn that it w as a waste of taxpayers money to approve such an amendment <br />w hen the school has not asked for such a change. Hawn said she felt the school would <br />come before the C ommissioti if asked to do so Schroeder said it was a procedural matter. <br />Mayor Callahan reminded the ('ommission that it was the Council who requested the <br />Planning Commission to review the proposed amendment. He asked that the Commission <br />decide if an arena was feasible as an accessory use and if it should be on the school <br />property only .\t that point. Callahan said the Commission could decide on specific <br />performance standards He added that the particular building does not answer the <br />fundamental question of a facility as an accessory use He noted the Council's interest in <br />the philosophical need of such facilities as a civic concern.