My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/17/2006 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
01/17/2006 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/15/2012 3:31:50 PM
Creation date
5/15/2012 3:31:47 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Tuesday,January 17,2006 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#06-3173 INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ZONING STANDARDS, CONTINUED) <br /> Larry Palm, 2687 Highway 12, stated he has a concern regarding the vagueness of the landscaping section <br /> and other sections of the City Code. Palm stated it is frustrating to have to do the planning at the time of <br /> the Planning Commission and City Council meetings because there is no clear direction in the code. <br /> Palm noted the light section contains no details and that in his view the City has an obligation to specify <br /> the standards. <br /> Bremer stated the City does have a lighting standard. <br /> Palm indicated he has only seen the draft ordinance. <br /> Jurgens stated to his recollection the City does specify the foot candles in the lighting section of the City's <br /> code. <br /> Gaffron indicated the City has a one sentence lighting code which states that you are not to be able to see <br /> the source of the light from the property line and that the City does not currently specify candle lumens. <br /> Gaffron stated the Planning Commission does need to review the lighting ordinance in the future. <br /> Palm requested the City be more speci�c in their standards. <br /> Leslie stated he is in agreement with Palm's comments. <br /> Palm inquired how this ordinance would apply to existing buildings if there were no modi�cations <br /> planned for the building. <br /> Gaffron stated Staffls expectation is that this ordinance would not apply unless there were some <br /> modifications being proposed for the site. <br /> Grittman stated language to that effect could probably be more clearly stated in the ordinance. <br /> Mark Shouting, Ryan Companies, stated they are interested in potentially redeveloping the property at <br /> Wayzata Boulevard and Crystal Bay Road. Shouting indicated they appreciate the inclusion of their <br /> recommendations in the draft ordinance. <br /> Shouting stated the first item he would like to discuss regards Item B, Building Permits and Council <br /> Review. Shouting indicated the language implies that all building applications will be reviewed by City <br /> Council, which is a little unusual. <br /> Gaffron stated all building permit applications are required by current code to be reviewed by the <br /> council,but that in reality on minor remodeling the building inspector has used his discretion and not <br /> brought those minor changes to the council's attention. <br /> Shouting stated that is a little unusual in their experience. Shouting stated the section on conditional uses <br /> PAGE 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.