My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-15-1997 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
12-15-1997 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/10/2019 2:39:33 PM
Creation date
7/10/2019 2:39:32 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />WORK SESSION HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1997 <br />telling the City what his plans are. Gaffron said a possibility is to have a policy with <br />goals without the use of a list and formula and ask the developer how he will obtain the <br />goals. This, however, would give no guidelines. Hawn asked if this could present legal <br />problems. Gaffron said that may happen. <br />Lindquist indicated that each lot is reviewed individually and sees the need to review <br />each plan as they are all unique. <br />Gaffron cited the example of the Sugar Woods Development and what could have <br />occurred on that property. Schroeder said the enormous amount of tree saving was <br />accomplished in part because the property is sewered. Buffering on Brown Road was <br />also a good decision in that development plan. McMillan agreed that public good results <br />• from buffering. Schroeder indicated that it is conceivable that a developer or homeowner <br />may not want a buffer. The Dickey property was cited as an example. Schroeder said he <br />would like to see the ordinance provide some "teeth" by which to ensure that a buffer is <br />provided. Wilson agreed that buffering would aid in preserving the rural feel of the <br />community. <br />Hawn asked if the present resolution refers to any subdivision or a subdivision of at least <br />three lots. Gaffron said a Class III Subdivision includes three or more lots. A Class I1 <br />Subdivision is a lot which is split off from an existing property. There is also a metes and <br />bounds division. Lindquist thought the policy should refer to subdivisions of two or <br />more lots. <br />McMillan noted that the Brook Park Realty Subdivision for townhomes is an example <br />• where buffering is limited by the right -of -way due to wetlands. The buffering will be <br />11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.