My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-22-2017 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2017
>
05-22-2017 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/24/2019 2:54:40 PM
Creation date
5/24/2019 2:45:09 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.
/
279
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 THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, May 8,2017 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />16. #17-3922 CITY OF ORONO, TEXT AMENDMENT: WETLANDS REGULATIONS — <br />ORDINANCE NO. 196, Third Series. — continued <br />Round -Up and dandelion deterrent. Printup stated sometimes they go off topic and get emotional but that <br />he is having a hard time making the connection. <br />Dankey indicated she does not agree with Council Member Printup and that if you allow people to go <br />closer to the buffer, there will be creep because that is the way people are. Dankey stated she is fine with <br />the setback the way it is. <br />Printup indicated he is okay with the desktop wetland delineation. <br />Dankey stated some of the delineation maps seem a little extreme and that she is not sure how accurate <br />they are. <br />Crosby stated he would like to see that more defined and that the Council could consider allowing things <br />that will not interfere with the wetland. <br />Walsh stated the Council could also leave things as is and simply allow fire pits within the setback. <br />Barnhart noted a recreational fire is 3 x 3 x 3 and a fire pit can be any size. <br />Seals stated she is undecided about the data that was submitted and whether the setback should be <br />changed at this time. Seals stated in her view the City can do better than Option I or Option 2 but that in <br />her view people will creep closer to the wetland if the setbacks are reduced. Seals stated she would like <br />to keep everything the same until the Council looks at it further. Seals stated in her view a larger setback <br />will not solve all the problems that Long Lake is having since there are other factors that need to be <br />addressed. <br />Seals noted the Planning Commission said they don't have enough information and she also does not feel <br />she has enough information. Seals suggested the Council invite the Watershed District to one of the <br />Council's work sessions to talk about why the buffers are the way they are and what the impacts are. <br />Seals stated she would like to have a larger discussion about what can be done to improve the water <br />quality of the various lakes. <br />Crosby stated he would also like somebody from the Watershed District to speak with the Council and <br />that perhaps the City can be a little flexible by allowing fire pits within the setback. <br />Dankey commented it unfortunately is too late to make the setbacks and buffers better since the homes <br />are already there and that a 1 00 -foot buffer is never going to happen. <br />Walsh stated it appears the City Council is in favor of the desktop wetland delineation and to send this <br />back to Planning Commission to look at setbacks, possible flexibility for some items within the setback, <br />and to obtain additional information from the Watershed District before a final decision is made. <br />Seals moved, Printup seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 196, Third Series, an Ordinance <br />Amending the Code of Ordinances Pertaining to Wetland Regulations, Option 1. VOTE: Ayes 5, <br />Nays 0. <br />Page 32 of 34 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.