My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-12-1997 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
09-12-1997 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/10/2019 2:34:54 PM
Creation date
7/10/2019 2:34:54 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
• MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />TREE PRESERVATION WORK SESSION HELD SEPTEMBER 12,1997 <br />Gaffron thought the tree preservation discussions were a direct result of the Spring Hill Golf Course, <br />since there was not an ordinance in place to protect the Big Woods. Because of the acreage involved <br />in Spring Hill, the golf course could possibly still have been developed. There are no ordinances to <br />prevent development of that area into two acre lots. If the City wants to preserve large wooded <br />areas, incentives need to be offered to developers. Clustering is a possibility but this would require <br />sewer. Council has not been in favor of clustering. <br />Lindquist thought that if they go beyond the policy statement, an ordinance would either be directed <br />at woodland preservation or the 25 -50 trees per acre standard, and he was unsure if either was <br />appropriate. <br />Hawn questioned how a developer might perceive a policy statement. Van Zomeren responded that <br />an experienced developer may work differently and have different expectations than the <br />inexperienced developer. Hawn added that even the seasoned developer would object to something <br />that would "hit them in the pocketbook ". <br />Gaffron stated the existing subdivision code refers to preservation of natural features and shade trees <br />planted by a subdivider. The goal would be to add a statement that gives better direction as to what <br />is the City is trying to preserve. Lindquist agreed with this suggestion. Berg asked if Gaffron could <br />develop a section to add to the existing ordinance. Berg felt is was difficult to define the number of <br />trees that would be appropriate on two acres. <br />Stoddard asked if the Sugar Woods concept of development is what the City was looking for. Berg <br />responded there were not a lot of areas similar to Sugar Woods in Orono. <br />Gappa referred to the Soskin development. The stormwater pond was put in an area where there <br />were not a lot of significant trees in order to preserve the more mature trees. <br />Van Zomeren asked if a tree preservation ordinance was a tool for Planning Commission and <br />Council to slow down development or prevent development, or if it is a guideline to get better <br />development and try to retain the character of Orono. She did not want to see an ordinance <br />developed as a weapon to prevent development. Berg felt the ordinance was to continue the integrity <br />of the topography of the land being developed with the least impact using a common -sense approach <br />to development. <br />Smith asked if the tree preservation issues were coming from Council or if Council was responding <br />to citizen concern. Gaffron responded that he thought Council wanted to have this tool in place prior <br />to the golf course application, not to prevent the golf course but to prevent the destruction of the <br />woods. Tree preservation was discussed shortly before the golf course application was received. <br />• 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.