My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-10-1989 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1989
>
04-10-1989 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/4/2025 9:31:14 AM
Creation date
4/1/2025 2:01:17 PM
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.
/
552
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
Zoning File #1386 <br />April 6, 1989 <br />Page 7 of 9 <br />Staff is getting redundant, but remember there is greater flexibility <br />for the applicant in site planning for a limited site. This site has <br />definite limitations. The depth is nan w; there is a wetland located <br />within the center of the property, and the property is a corner lot located <br />on Highway 12 and a potential county road. Once again, all future use of <br />the property is controlled under the development agreement required for all <br />uses within a PUD district. Any other new use or major change in curent <br />use would require new review by the City. The PUD for this property would <br />approve a garden center use exclusively. Any other additional uses would <br />have to come before the City under a formal application. A PUD form of <br />development was deemed even more appropriate during the Planning Commission <br />review because of the makeup of the ownership of the properties within the <br />Highway 12 corridor. There appears to be a total of 5 to 6 specific <br />ownerships of large acred parcels of the undeveloped lands included within <br />the scope of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. The majority of the <br />Planning Commission denied Mr. Otten’s petition to rezone to B-1 finding <br />the B-1 zoning lacked the necessary controls over future development and to <br />be in complete conflict with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan amend <br />ment. The one denial vote approved the B-1 zoning because of the positive <br />aspect of the proposed use and of the long delays sustained by Mr. Otten. <br />Planning Commission encouraged Mr. Otten to file a subdivision and <br />commercial site plan application and to await a PUD ordinance. <br />In consideration of the land use application options of the applicant, <br />staff would note that it would be to applicant's advantage to await the <br />approval of a PUD ordinance amendment because the rezoning, subdivision, <br />and the commercial site plan review can be completed under one application. <br />The exii’ting ordinances require first approval of a rezoning application <br />that cou .d take approximately 2 months for finalization, then a separate <br />subdivision that can take anywhere from 3 to 4 months, then upon completion <br />of the subdivision application, applicant would then be allowed to file a <br />commercial site plan review. Under the proposed PUD ordinance, the <br />comprehensive application could be completed within 3 review phases. The <br />tot" review could be completed in approximately 3 to 4 months. The <br />existing code would require a total of 7 to 8 months.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.