Laserfiche WebLink
i 4 i f <br /> MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 1997 <br /> (#11 - #2240 Jim Waters Sketch Plan- Continued) <br /> Gaffron showed Lindquist the boundary lines of the MUSA through this property. <br /> Gaffron said the property would have to be within the MUSA for the plan to work. <br /> Lindquist, Stoddard, and Smith agreed that there were problems with sketch plan 4 as <br /> presented. <br /> There were no public comments at this time. <br /> Waters reported having attempted to contact Irene Silber, a neighbor of this property, to <br /> no avail. Lindquist agreed that it is important to receive neighborhood input. <br /> McMillan said she saw the biggest obstacle as being whether the Council would <br /> recommend amending the comprehensive plan and applying for a MUSA amendment. She <br /> acknowledged the impacts of development without sewering while noting the higher <br /> density required in sewered areas. <br /> Lindquist responded that sketch plan 2 that involves two acre zoning would answer these <br /> concerns. Gaffron indicated that this plan calls for 16 lots averaging 1.68 acres. Gaffron <br /> said he does not believe all of the lots could supply septic sites with the steep topography. <br /> Schroeder indicated that sketch plan 2 would include seven 2-acre lots according to the <br /> zoning but not septic requirements. He questioned how many lots could provide septic. <br /> Gaffron indicated there were about 14 lots that could provide septic noting lots 9 and 11 <br /> could not. McMillan noted that running sewer to the property at this density might not be <br /> economical. Schroeder indicated that the cost concern would be a problem for the <br /> developer to consider. <br /> Gaffron indicated that if no change was made to the zoning and the properties were <br /> sewered, sketch plan 2 would work. If sewering is not possible, sketch plan 2 would not <br /> work. <br /> Schroeder asked Waters what would happen if the Council did not recommend a MUSA <br /> amendment. Waters said he would ask for direction and felt a development along the lines <br /> of sketch plan 2 would work. He noted that the road would probably be as pTesented in <br /> sketch plan 3 and sewering would go up to the MUSA portion with the two acre lots not <br /> having connection rights. He would provide septic sites where possible. <br /> McMillan questioned whether the sketch plan could be sent to the Council without a direct <br /> recommendation. <br /> Lindquist suggested determining the opinion of the home owners in the area about sketch <br /> plan 3. He feels it would not make sense to by-pass the two-acre lots from sewering. <br /> 20 <br />