My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-12-1998 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
1998
>
10-12-1998 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/27/2012 1:24:50 PM
Creation date
9/27/2012 1:24:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
• <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 12, 1998 <br />( #9) #2389 DANIEL KLUTH, 2801 FOX STREET - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - <br />RESOLUTION NO. 4172 <br />Daniel Kluth was present. <br />Weinberger stated the Planning Commission has recommended this application be approved contingent <br />upon approval by the City Council of the Zoning Code Amendment. <br />Mayor Jabbour confirmed with the applicant that in the case the lot does become smaller than 2 acres, <br />the plumbing in the accessory structure would need to be removed. <br />Kluth acknowledged the finding of the ordinance with the mayor. <br />Moved by Kelley, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution No. 4172 approving Application <br />#2389, granting a Conditional Use Permit to the Zoning Code Amendment Regulating Plumbing <br />in Accessory Structures. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />( #10) INTERIM USES <br />Gaffron reported to Council that during prior Council review it was noted that the ordinance. language <br />• does not strictly follow the language in the statutes, and that the criteria for interim uses should be <br />spelled out. The reason for the interim use ordinance would be to allow temporary use of a property that <br />might not be suited for uses it has been used for in the past, but could get some reasonable use for the <br />next few years until it is taken for Hwy 12. <br />Kelley questioned if the City was considering doing this ordinance strictly for the financial gain of the <br />property owner. <br />Moorse stated this ordinance is to provide some interim use of property where the current uses in the <br />zone are not feasible. This would result in a financial gain for the property owner. <br />Barrett stated he has no concerns with the way the ordinance is drafted. Barrett felt the ordinance <br />focuses on the specific pieces of property for a specific period of time. <br />Kelley asked what properties are mostly affected by this ordinance. <br />Gaffron replied the daycare at the intersection of Hwy 12 and County Road 6, and potentially the Dog <br />House Kennel. <br />Page 9 <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.