10-28-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

t'- ■ r F I- . - p-.i- /■ Tos Mayor Peterson ft Orono Council Members City Administrator Moorse /; r From 3 Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator October 23, 1991 Subject: #1693 Albert D. Hanser, 1685 Fox St. - Variance 7$g Subdivision Moratorium ^ List of Bxhlbits Exhibit A Exhibit B ^AkJki4 C. - Notice of Planning Commission Action 10/23/91 - Memo and Exhibits of 10/16/91 -/ecv/Jet Discussion Please carefully review the memo and exhibits of October 16th. Briefly, the applicants appeared before the Planning Commission on October 21st with a sketch plan review and request for a variance to the subdivision moratorium. The Planning Commission briefly reviewed the intent of the moratorium and recommended denial of a variance to the moratorium. It appears that the Planning Commission's recommendation was partially based on general principle, l.e. the moratorium is in place strictly to hold this type of application in abeyance until the new regulations are effective. The Planning Commission also noted that certain variances were Inherent in the proposed plan, which need to be addressed by the applicants. The Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 for denial of the Bioratorium variance, and determined that they would not proceed with the review of the sketch plan until such time that the Council grants a variance to the moratorium, or the moratorium ceases. Farlanoa Procedure As noted in the October 16th memo, granting a variance to the moratorium must be based on the following considerations: 1. Does the proposal meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan? 2.Does the proposed plan meet the proposed Shoreland Standards? 3.Does the proposed subdivision promote the general health, safety and welfare? 4.Is there a legitimate hardship borne by the applicant if a variance is not granted? <?