My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-16-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2007
>
01-16-2007 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2012 3:27:26 PM
Creation date
6/19/2012 3:26:59 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.
/
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
MINUTES OF TII� � <br /> � ORONO�'LANNING COM11'1ISSION � <br /> A�Ionday,November 20,2006 , <br /> 6:00 o'clocl.p.ni. , <br /> � Bremer staLed in lier opiilioi�there rvas good public notice given but tliat she would be tivilling fo table the <br /> application based oii the connnents of Steve Jolmston. <br /> Gaffi on inquired whether the distance of the people being notified should Ue increased. Gaffi•on stated <br /> t11e City requires a 350-foot notification. <br /> Brenzer sfated she does not lcnotiv if ihat was not suf�cient iu this case,Uut�vould uot be opposed to <br /> sendiiig out�ublic notice to a��ider area given the density. <br /> Gaffion stated all fihe le�al notices are Iiai�ded to the�olice depattulent and they are su��osed to be posted . <br /> at the same time that the notices are sent out. Gaffro�i stated legal iiotice is posted at the Long Lake Post - <br /> Office. Gaffroil indicated he«�ould ask the police departinent���hether the notices are getting posted. <br /> Bremer inquired��hether there is also�notice given in the iietivs��.per. <br /> Gaffron stated there is also notice given in the nervspaper. <br /> ICempf stated he is not opposed to tabling t11e ap�lication and that he is not opposed io soine�.ype of retail <br /> on this site. � <br /> I�oeger stated tliis is a city-rvide issue and suggested the local papers v�nite an article concerning the . <br /> suUject. IG:oegcr stated this application involves a inajor decision of the City conceniing that area and <br /> that it rvould be beneficial to have as niaily people provide in�ut as possiUle. <br /> � ICeml�f asked whether a PUD ��rould require further restrictions oi the B-6 Dishict. <br /> Gaffron stated�vith a�lanned unit development process the City has some fle�ibility in�vorlcing with the <br /> developer on t]Ze various issues as�vell as density. Gaffi•on stated the Stoneliay develo}�ment�vas a <br /> • plamied unit developinent. State statutes reqLiire that there be some consistency bet�veen the Ciiy's <br /> zoning and the Conlprehensive Plan ay�d that the City Attorney has reconunended fihe area Ue zoned as <br /> elose as possible to tlle type of dishict that it is guided for in the Comprehensive Plan, , <br /> Johnston nofed a PUD requires a four=Fifl:hs vote, �vhich gives�the City even more conh•ol over the <br /> development. <br /> R�.G�39 . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.