Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,October 21,2013 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Stickney indicated he would not need one but that there would be an agreement that would regulate tree <br /> maintenance and provide for no build zones. <br /> Schwingler asked how enforceable that type of situation would be. <br /> Gaffron stated Staff would prefer the outlot situation. Gaffron stated people will want to erect fences and <br /> maintain past the line of what they perceive the easement to be. Markers could be erected but the <br /> association would be somewhat self-limiting since each property owner would own a portion of that back <br /> parcel. Gaffron stated under that situation there are potentially more issues with enforcement when the <br /> land is under individual ownership that may be more difficult to deal with than with ownership by the <br /> association. <br /> Lemke asked whether that land could be dedicated or given to the City as an option. <br /> Gaffron indicated the City normally does not do that. Gaffron noted there is no access to the back portion <br /> of the property under this scenario. Normally the City would require maintenance of the storm water <br /> ponds by the association and it is not something the City would like to maintain control of. <br /> Thiesse indicated he agrees with the applicant that the individuals should own that piece of land all the <br /> way back since the same standards could be applied. Thiesse asked whether there would be an access <br /> easement for Lot 4 around the pond to access their back yard. <br /> Stickney stated it would be a no build zone so there would not be fences. <br /> Thiesse stated in his view the City can control the rear portion of the property and that it is easier to deal <br /> with a single homeowner. <br /> Stickney stated the property would be held to a higher standard in that situation but the individual <br /> property owners would be in control of the land. <br /> McGrann asked whether all of them would have access to walk around the pond. <br /> Stickney stated the neighbors would have access to the area but could not build back there. <br /> Gaffron indicated there is precedent for doing what Mr. Stickney is suggesting. Gaffron noted the <br /> Creekside subdivision located off of Brown Road has a tree preservation area within two individual lots <br /> which is not part of a homeowners association. <br /> McGrann asked if someone could landscape in that area or whether other limitations would be placed on <br /> the land. <br /> Gaffron stated the City would expect under the conservation easement is no mowing,no cutting, no <br /> fences, no accessory structures and virtually no use of it. The area would need to stay natural. If the <br /> neighborhood would like to create paths,that could be allowed,but the conservation easement would <br /> basically require that the natural features remain as natural as possible. <br /> Stickney stated that type of arrangement works nice and there would be stipulations and penalties for not <br /> following the covenant. <br /> Page 15 of 42 <br />