My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/17/2006 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
04/17/2006 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2012 2:45:24 PM
Creation date
6/19/2012 2:45:23 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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 PLAN1vING CONIlVIISSION MEETING <br /> . Monday,Apri117,2006 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#06-3185 WJM Properties, Continued) <br /> Gaffron stated Staff would be working with the applicant,the City Engineer,and the City Attorney to <br /> define what elements of the improvements need to be covered under a development agreement. Gaffron <br /> noted there are eight issues for consideration by the Planning Commission listed in his report. <br /> Johnson stated this application was prepared in part because the City's industrial code was scheduled to <br /> be amended and they would like the front of the site to be fully developed and the back of the lot to be <br /> undeveloped. Johnson stated the issue with the City to date has been retail auto sales and that there are no <br /> plans to have retail auto sales at this site. <br /> Johnson indicated they have had difficulty getting the customers to go to the rear of the building to access <br /> the body shop and that Staff has advised them that signage in the industrial park is not intended to direct <br /> traffic from Highway 12. Johnson stated the purpose of the two flagpoles is to help direct people to the <br /> body shop and not to attract customers off of Highway 12. <br /> Johnson stated the specific language concerning open sales lots and display of automobiles in an open <br /> sales lot is not allowed by conditional use permit under the new ordinance but that the city attorney has <br /> indicated that there is no intention to limit the use that has already been granted a conditional use permit. ` <br /> Johnson stated as they grow into this site,it would be inappropriate to be limited to 40 cars that can be <br /> test driven,noting that they have a number of car manufacturers that would like to present cars to <br /> customers and that 40 cars would not allow them to have a variety of product on site. <br /> Johnson stated they would have lots of parking available for employees and cars in process and still be <br /> able to grow on this lot. <br /> Kroeger inquired whether this is the body shop for all of Morries' lots. <br /> Johnson stated the idea is that the retail arm is going to be primarily devoted to marketing and repairing <br /> cars on a day-to-day basis and that bodywork would be referred. <br /> Kroeger inquired whether people would be driving in to obtain estimates. <br /> Johnson stated the monument sign language does make reference to bodywork. <br /> Kroeger inquired whether they would prepare an estimate for someone who drives in off the street. <br /> Johnson stated they would. Johnson stated they are under limitations due to the sign ordinance. <br /> Winkey stated he is,for the most part,comfortable with what is being proposed for the property and that <br /> the site looks like a business rather than a car dealership lot. Winkey indicated he appreciates the <br /> landscaping that has been done. Winkey stated he does not want to have the look of a car dealership <br /> along Highway 12,which is what the poles in his opinion do to the property. Winkey inquired whether <br /> Morries has a problem with people locating their property. <br /> PAGE 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.