My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-16-2018 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2018
>
04-16-2018 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2020 3:54:11 PM
Creation date
1/14/2020 3:27:06 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.
/
268
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 PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MONDAY, MARCH 19, 2018 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />10 -foot separation as well as the 25 -foot setback. Staff is now proposing a 25 -foot setback, which <br />removes that extra level of setback that many cities do not require, <br />Staff also proposes removing the table that talks about the type of protection classification for the <br />wetland, the description, and the additional protection. Since that is regulated by the Watershed District, <br />Staff felt it was redundant. <br />Barnhart stated at this time Staff is looking for a recommendation from the Planning Commission to take <br />to the City Council. <br />Schoenzeit stated the extra 10 feet was added to help in situations where there was a door leading out to <br />the back yard and there was a buffer. Schoenzeit stated the extra 10 feet was designed to give the <br />homeowner some extra room and this seems to take that away. Schoenzeit suggested Staff consider <br />adjusting it for a door going out to that area. Schoenzeit stated if the door is on the side of the house and <br />not next to the buffer area, they might not need that extra room. <br />Thiesse noted it was the City's request previously to add that extra 10 feet. <br />Schoenzeit stated that extra 10 feet provides additional protection to the wetland buffer. <br />Thiesse stated they could also state that no door is allowed into that area. <br />Barnhart stated the Watershed District's sole purpose is to protect the wetland, and it was the thinking that <br />if the Watershed District does not require an additional setback to the buffer, why should the City. <br />Thiesse stated the minute something is allowed right next to that buffer, activity is going to start to occur <br />within the buffer because there is a need to maintain someone's property. <br />Landgraver noted in the past the Planning Commission has recommended the additional protection be <br />added. <br />Schoenzeit stated it is similar to the 75 -foot zone rather than a 50 -foot setback. <br />Thiesse stated his concern is if the 10 feet is removed, all that accomplishes is that the structure is moved <br />up to that buffer and the City now has something they cannot enforce. <br />Barnhart stated the homeowner can walk in that area but they cannot mow or add fertilizer. Barnhart <br />stated to some degree it is not the City's rule to enforce and it falls to the Watershed District. <br />Page 19 of 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.