My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-03-1995 Park Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Park Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
04-03-1995 Park Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/13/2020 4:02:41 PM
Creation date
1/13/2020 4:02:40 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING <br /> MINUTES FOR APRIL 3, 1995 <br /> (#2) Discussion of Proposed Development near French Creek Preserve <br /> Bob Melamed was present . He handed out 2 sketch plans, Plan A is <br /> offering a buffer area where no trees could be removed within 30' <br /> to 50' around the entire property boundaries, plus an 8% cash Park <br /> Dedication fee . Plan B, is to donate 1 . 23± acres of land on Lot 4 , <br /> adjacent to the French Creek Park Reserve . <br /> Flint asked for the buffer dimensions on Sketch A. <br /> Melamed stated it is 50' on the east . There is not much on the <br /> north because there is not much vegetation there . The owner of <br /> Lot 1 and Art Ellis are going to want more privacy from each other <br /> and we are going to have to do some more screening. What I 'm <br /> trying to do for the people who are living there, is feel like the <br /> home is not out in the open to Old Crystal Bay Road. <br /> Flint summarized Melamed, saying that on the east it would be 50' <br /> easement, on the north it would be 30' easement, on the south it <br /> would be a 50 ' easement and basically 50' on the west except on the <br /> west it gets wider as you get north of Lot 2 and 3 . <br /> Melamed agreed. <br /> Flint asked Mabusth, whether it was true that the envelope around <br /> the property would be required irrespective of Park Commission <br /> consideration. Mabusth stated that the City is granting this <br /> developer, if it goes with Plan A, a variance to the subdivision <br /> regulations because the regulations require an internal road, with <br /> one curb cut so as to serve all 4 lots . The Planning Commission <br /> has accepted this property as unique and need to be addressed for <br /> its special consideration so they are willing to grant the <br /> variance . But in return for the variance, the City wants to be <br /> assured that the trees would be protected and not only would we <br /> be looking for exterior buffers, we would probably look for <br /> buffers along the lot lines, something similar to Sugarwood, where <br /> the whole point was to preserve the trees . The City would require <br /> preservation of the trees notwithstanding Park Commissions <br /> consideration, but additional limitations such as prohibition of <br /> fencing along the buffer might be imposed because of Park <br /> Commission considerations . <br /> Flint questioned the city road entering the preserve, being <br /> improved as normally would be required by the addition of even one <br /> driveway. <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.