My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-27-1989 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1989
>
02-27-1989 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:00:47 AM
Creation date
3/21/2025 9:57:54 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.
/
428
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
would apply only when someone came forward with a proposal and <br />requested that the current zoning be amended to a planned <br />development zone. Unlike some communities the City would not <br />designate or rezone a piece of property to a planned development <br />zoning in the areas that are currently undeveloped until it is <br />requested. <br />Future Councils <br />The issue of future Councils or for that matter the issue of <br />future action by this Council was discussed. With the currently <br />existing zoning ordinances and the process by which they can be <br />amended, the addition of a planned development does not give <br />those individuals anything they would not already have or <br />couldn't pass if they were so inclined. It takes the same 4/5 s <br />vote to rezone a property to Planned Development as it does to <br />adopt the ordinance or amend the Comprehensive Plan. Any <br />rezoning must be in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and if <br />not an amendment to such must be undertaken. <br />Other issues earlier identified included: <br />Project Density <br />Development Criteria <br />Minimum Acreage <br />Process and Review <br />Additional issues that had not been directly discussed with <br />Council include: <br />Changes to Approved Planned Developments — Should a developer or <br />owner de“^re to (deviate from what was approved would require a <br />new rezoning to the amended Planned Development for any change <br />deemed major. (Either the Planned Development Ordinance or the <br />specific development agreement can define what is major and what <br />is not. Changes deemed to be minor would be reviewed by staff.) <br />"Undeveloped* Planned Development - If a CUP/PRD is not developed <br />it just reaverts to the original zoning. A Planned Development as <br />a zoning stays for the particular developemnt approved and any <br />change requries a new rezoning. <br />Burden of Proof ■* In light of Nollan vs California, the burden is <br />on the“City to demonstrate that any requirements of the <br />CUP/Subdivision are related directly to the development. In a <br />Planned Development zoning, the burden of proof is on the <br />proponent to prove to the Council's satisfaction that the overall <br />development is an improvement (including any Council desired <br />requirements). <br />ALTERNATIVES - <br />Action ^ " <br />1. Determine other issues of concern to the Council.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.