Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />W « <br />TO: <br />FROM <br />Mayor and City Council <br />'tr fv <br />Mark Bernhardson, City Adrainistrator.v,/ <br />OATS: January 31r 1989 <br />SOBJBCT: Planning Commission Resoonsibilitias <br />A. Options Regarding Land Use Reviews - 4/1/88 <br />hy <br />/,■ <br />i <br />V <br />'■f- <br />h <br />f"- <br />I <br />fI <br />r <br />ir <br />b <br />i- <br />/ <br />k <br />■ r <br />i * <br />,b. <br />I'- <br />r-r <br />f <br />[f: <br />bl ■I <br />I <br />views on <br />^ c»ar ^ w <br />•silite'!Ilj!,'V'. <br />11^. <br />ISStJS ' <br />1. Opportunity Cor Representatives to snare their <br />Planning Commission responsibilities and ralationsr.ips <br />Council* <br />thair desire to discuss this issue with the Council as to thei. <br />vie%fpoints on the matter. <br />DISCOSSIOW - In addition to the outline and views to of, f f <br />by^the Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair <br />to this Item, I did have the opportunity to v-is^uss w.esa <br />concepts with an Orono resident, Dick Putnam. In the course o^ <br />our dlacuaaion he indicated that there may be a possibility .o <br />utilise the existing Planning Commission to perform tjie t .o <br />differing *unctions of longer range planning together Board <br />ot Appea’:' by separating the types of issues <br />meetings. The idee is that longterm planning, <br />toning ordinance amendment work be done In one meeting <br />the Board of Appeals be held at a second meeting wO conSid-. <br />conditional use permits, variances and appeals of <br />Administrator daclsions. (If separate Boards <br />aandltiona 1 use permits would need to be done by tne Planning <br />?2Il2lSi?S2.) such could b. .Ho».d und.c th. curc.nt .ch.dula <br />for the summer months and provisions however need to be made for <br />the months apart from May through September. <br />The other suggestion was to work on roning ordinances <br />Task Force. ^The Task Force approach may be most appropriate for <br />the anticipated overall review of the City’s soning and <br />subdivision ^apter. The work product dev *7- >ed wou-d <br />to be reviewed by the Planning Commission a Counci-, under the <br />oiierent ordinsnce end according to State ia«». <br />Tbc sealnc »t«tt h«« .d.lMd that th. «aJocity of <br />Cammieelon members did not wish to split the duties of <br />eomission (monthly Zoning Board of Appeals and monthl- P <br />rnmml is Inn meeting to review Conditional Use Perma.ts, Subd <br />«te ? Commission members preferred the acti... s <br />Task FV/ca*(both Council and Planning Commission memb-sts) to <br />’sUo