1997 - Zoning File 2293 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CTTY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 23, 1997 (#7-#2240 Jim Waters Sketch Plan - Continued) Flint voiced another concern. He said he has difficulty viewing this application as a PRD without the Soliner and Soskin properties. He would like the entire area looked at as a whole. Gaffron responded that the proposal did consider the whole area for the PRD. Flint questioned what control there would be on the Sollner and Soskin properties and what impacts would be felt on the entire area by the subdivision. Jabbour asked Gaffron if Staff agreed or disagreed with Flint. Gaffron said he agreed that the Park and Planning Commissions need to review the whole area comprehensively. He indicated that the Park Commission has not seen the most recent plan. They saw the plan for the Soliner property and the first draft of the northern area. Gaffron said the Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan for the southern property but did not find it necessary to pass the sketch plan for that area on to the Council. Gaflion said the Planning Commission felt the properties required sewering and a PRD to achieve the open space amenities. Gaffron said the applicant could provide reasoning for the plans and Staff sees the proposal as viable. Jabbour asked Gaffron if Staff is satisfied with the southern plan in terms of number of units and density. Gaffron indicated that the subdivisions could be considered together or separately, and that the southerly plan would meet density requirements. He noted there are issues regarding density with the northern plan. Jabbour asked if there is a mechanism by which to deal with the subdivision as a PRD. Gaffron said there was as long as the property is sewered and Council found adequate reasons. Jabbour asked if the PRD could occur without sewering. Gaffron said no. Goetten asked about the status of the property being considered for a park. Waters said he has an option on the two Sollner lots. Waters said he understands that the full Council is not here and understands the reservations regarding the concepts. He asked to be able to discuss briefly why the particular approach has been taken. Waters noted when the City acquired the Saga Hill park property, all of the land that was within the MUSA was considered prime property for development with the platted right- of-way access to the site. With the creation of the park,Waters said the City desired to gain access to the park and limit access through the park. He said that in effect landlocks the two parcels within the MUSA,the Sollner lots,both zoned one acre and eligible for sewering. Waters said some benefit could be achieved by providing access to the park via Garden Lane to the Sollner property without making the park become a through street. Waters reviewed the sketch plans presented. • 7