Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 97 <br /> (#11 - #2240 Jim Waters Sketch Plan - Continued) <br /> Smith questioned what "undisturbed areas" were and how they would be controlled. <br /> Waters said this could be done through conservation easement, association regulations, <br /> covenants, depending on the level of restriction desired. Smith said she would not want to <br /> see ball fields or uses that would deviate from the open space concept. Lindquist said the <br /> controls could make that determination. Smith said other applications where such <br /> intentions were made resulted in other uses. She requested controls be placed that would <br /> maintain the open space. <br /> Lindquist received confirmation from Waters that he-would meet with the Council and the <br /> homeowners in the area. Gaffron asked for clearer direction regarding MUSA, zoning, <br /> clustering, noting the Park Commission's review indicated requesting park fee or land <br /> would depend on the plan. <br /> Lindquist said he preferred all of the property be within the MUSA under a PRD. <br /> McMillan questioned whether accessory structures should be allowed. Schroeder <br /> indicatred that two acre zoning with sewering could accommodate accessory structures. <br /> If a PRP was used, the City could insist on covenants. Gaffron said the developer could <br /> be asked to restrict the use in the PRD. <br /> Schroeder said he preferTed the. property all be within the MUSA- use of clustering <br /> concept at a density level less than 19 lots(preferring 14 or 15 maximum), trails tied in to <br /> the surrounding area, noting sketch plan 3 as the preferred plan. <br /> Smith said she agreed with the comments made by Schroeder and Lindquist. As a second <br /> choice, Smith said she would recommend all lots be 2-acre zoning with both MUSA and <br /> non-MUSA. She would like to see controls placed on the open spaces, undisturbed areas, <br /> outlot, and stormwater pond. <br /> Schroeder questioned whether the 1 acre lots could be required to be changed to 2 acres. <br /> Gaffron said such a "downzoning" might create potential problems, getting into the issue <br /> of a"taking". <br /> Stoddard said he preferred all lots be within MUSS with sketch plan 3 preferred with one <br /> acre minimum lot size. He supported sketch plan 1 if all were within the MUSA at general <br /> 1.5 acre lots sizes. Stoddard said he appreciates the clustering concept. <br /> Gaffron noted that the Council will review the sketch plan at their upcoming meeting. <br /> 22 <br />