My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/01/2012
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2012
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/01/2012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:10:47 AM
Creation date
2/27/2012 11:22:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
03/01/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
96
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
Zoning Bulletin January 10, 2012 1 Volume 6 No. 1 <br />INDIANA <br />The .Greene County Commissioners plan to formally request District <br />62 State Rep. Matt Ubelhor (Republican-Bloomfield) introduce legislation <br />when the General Assembly convenes in early January, allowing a zoning <br />question to be placed on the November 2012 General Election ballot. The <br />zoning referendum bill would be specific only to Greene County. Current- <br />ly, Greene County is one of eight counties in the state that does not have <br />some kind of land-use planning ordinance currently in place. <br />Source: Greene County Daily World; ht <br />MASSACHUSETTS <br />The commonwealth's new casino legislation requires a local ballot ref- <br />erendum before any developer can win a casino license. <br />Source: Boston Globe; www.boston.com <br />NEW JERSEY <br />Bills pending in the state legislature (S-2950) and (A-4128) allow for <br />"modifications to municipal land use approvals because of changed eco- <br />nomics." The bills would allow certain property owners that have preex- <br />isting land use approvals the ability to submit applications for "adaptive <br />approvals" to the boards that issued the preexisting approvals in order to <br />modify the terms and conditions of the preexisting approvals and current <br />zoning. Among other things, the application would be required to specify <br />the changes being requested and to demonstrate that: the current zoning <br />or existing approval does not provide the property with an economically <br />viable use; no feasible market exists for development of the property based <br />upon the property's current zoning or existing approval; or financing for <br />the development of the property under current zoning or the existing ap- <br />proval is not readily available. The bill would require the approving board <br />to grant an adaptive approval if it determines that the applicant has com- <br />plied with the requirements set forth in the bill and that the application <br />can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good, to the ex- <br />tent it is not incompatible with the use of adjoining properties. <br />Source: S-2950; http:11www.njleg.state.nj.us <br />WISCONSIN <br />Assembly Republicans recently introduced "a sweeping bill to <br />streamline Wisconsin's mining regulations." The 183-page bill creates <br />a new set of laws specifically for iron mining. Among its major provi- <br />sions: the state's DNR "would have to approve or deny an iron mine <br />application within 360 days of deeming the application complete" (Cur- <br />rent state law does not lay out a deadline.); "contested case hearings <br />on DNR permitting decisions would be eliminated"; only those directly <br />injured by a mining operation could bring a lawsuit challenging DNR <br />© 2012 Thomson Reuters 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.