Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-02-25 08-105 ORDINANCEItem No. 08 105 Date: 4-25-08 Item/Subject Ordinance, Amending the Code of the City of Bangor, Chapter 165, Land Development Code, § 165-105, Rural Residenceand A gricehural District(RR 8, A), as Enactetl by the City Council on February 25, 2008 Responsible Department: Planning Commentary: This ordinance will make die Amendment of Chapter 165, $ 165-105(D), removing radio and television towers as conditional uses in Rural, Residential and Agricultural Districts, retroactive to July 1,200]. 4godD 3Y SuBsnn von Department Head Managers Comments: "74 PI>.�arr� �iad.eQ .rJ+�i.�%Sf—a wrll. �tt "s@.ryalYu.rt •Gr+IK a r OLy Manager ASSotlatetl Inform tion: �j ��lnAa7Q Budget Approval Finance Drector Legal Approval 5 (cit Introduced for Passage % First Reading Page _ of _ •_ Referral To Planning Board for Public Hearing March 4, 2008 06-105 As AMENDED z 'y CITY OF BANGOR (TITLE.) Ordinance, Amending the Code of the City of Bangor, Chapter 165, Land Development Code, § 165-105, Rural Residence and Agricultural District (RR & A), as Passed by the City Council on March 24, 2008: Be R ordahcd by Me 6ryofBangor, as follows. That the Code of the City of Bangor, Chapter 165, § 165-105(D), as amended by the City Council on March 24, 2008, apply retroactively to all actions and proceedings pending on July 1, 2007, notwtthstanding the provisions of 1 M.R.S. § 302. 08 105 Asaigved to Councilor Palmer February 25, 2008 CITY OF BANGOR (TITLE.) Ordinance, Amending the Code of the City of Bangor, Chapter 165, Land Development Cade, Q 165-105, Rural Residence and Agricultural Dlstdct(RR & A), as Enacted by the City Council on February 25, 2008: Be It otdahred by Me O'tyof&wW,, as Wbw : That the Code of the City of Bangor, Chapter 165, 4 165-105(D), as amended by the City Council on February 25, 2008, be effective retroactively th July 1, 2007. IN CITY COUNCIL February 25. 2008 Fits r. Yeaaing dna Heferrat to me/Plamiag Board, IN CITY COUNCIL March 24, 2008 Motion Hade and Seconded for Passage Notion Made and Seconded to Amend by Substitution Passed Residents Jim Devitt and Brad. Swett urged support.. Motion Made and Seconded for Passage as Amended Motion Doubted Vote: 6-2 Covuc ilora Voting Yes:. Blanchette, D'Errico, Guatwlek. Bowes, Falmer and Stone Councilors Voting No: Farrington and Wheeler C dots Absent: Creene Pa ed IT4 CLB&K NCF UOTLBJAtd'-+�g 'w^ ^^a ^f�_4_f Bangor, Chapter 165. Land Development Agricultural District (B ) as Enacted by }y L Assigned bCovaeBw I#?er MEMORANDUM DATE: March 5, 2008 TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: David G. Gould, Planning Officer SUBJECT: Amending Land Development Code Chapter 165-105(D), to be effective retroactively To July 1, 2007 Council Ordinance 08-105 Please be advised that the Planning Board at as regularly scheduled meeting on March 4, 2008 held a public hearing on the above Land Development Code Amendment, Planning Officer Gould indicated the proposed language was developed to make certain portions of the previous land development Code amendment (O&104) retroactive to before the approved July 3, 2007 AM radio application. Jim Devitt of 59 Hudson Road was in support of the proposed amendment because It would correct the Oversight in the land development code that provided for radio towers in a location where they would not Rt in. Beverly Shumaker 208 Finson Road indicated she was very, much in support of business but did not feel out of state business interests should trump the local citizens and taxpayers. Ms Shumaker was also concerned about the City's codification process and scheduling of hearings. Greg Swett, 260 Pinson Road was in support of retroactivity because if the previous tower project were constructed R would have negative implications an property values around it Steve Daniels, 208 finson Road noted he was in support of the retroactivity, Provision. Member Rosenblatt asked the Assistant City Solicitor w clarify why the retroactiry proposal was an issue far the Planning abard when it only dealt with the effective data of the amendment and not the amendment itself. Assistant City Solicitor Paul Nickles indicated Mat the Ordinance change was an amendment to the Land Development Code and therefore would procedurally cane to the Planning Board for hearing and recommendation. The Board voted 4 in favor and 2 opposed to recommend the City Council adopt OB -105. The minority view was that R was poor practice to change ordinance provisions retroactively after someone has relied on them In good falth.