08-24-1992 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 3, 1992 ROLL The Orono Planning Corrmission met on the above date with the foI lowing members present: Chair Charlie Kelley, Ed Cohen, Candace Rowlette, Jeff Johnson, and Stephen Peterson. Maureen Bellows arrived after the vote. Charles Schroeder was absent. Th;' fol lowing reoresented the City Staff: Planning and Zoning Aa >• >nistrator Michael Gaffron, and City Recorder Teri Naab. Chair Kolljy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (m) COM. <EHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 4 - STUBBS BAY/MUSA BOUNDARY REALIGNMENT - PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 - 7:08 P.M. The Affidavit of Pub'ication a^^d Certificate of Mailing were noted. Ga f f ron explained that COitipreheiia i ve PI ari Amendment Nc. 4 is an amenament to induce the StuoDs Bay project area within tne Metropolitan Council’s urban service area boundary. The area includes 137 property, 125 of which are developed, and 12 vacant lots. The City is not proposing to change any district boundaries or zoning standards. The amendment is to meet the criteria set by the Metropolitan Council recuiring a plan amendment to show the boundaries of the MUSA line as the City continues to sewer various portions of the City. He noted that in the past the City "^as gone ahead with a project and later aoo I i ed for the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. The Metropolitan Council has now asked that in the future amendments be requested prior to commencement of a pro j ect. Johnson asked the time line for the current MUSA boundary line for the City. Gaffron stated that the City has not adooted a specific "Year 2000“ MUSA per the Metrooolitan Council’s schematic. He said that the Stubbs Bay area is the last of five areas identified in the 1980 Comprehensive Plan, which were generally expected to be sewered by the 1990s. He noted that the City does not have any plans for future amendments. He explained that Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 3 has not been adopted by the Metropol i tan Counci I as they have requested additional information, and intend to address the issue of 64/640. He added that when North Oaks recently went through the same type of request the City will soon be going through, they were eventually allowed to continue with their current development of 1 to 1 1/2 acre unsewered development without a problem from the Metrooolitan Council. rmii ~ I ~*