My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-16-2020 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2020
>
03-16-2020 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2020 2:20:04 PM
Creation date
3/17/2020 1:57:44 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
191
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).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,February 18,2020 <br /> 6:00 p.m. <br /> Libby stated that was how he first pictured it but there are tree companies out there that have equipment <br /> that is capable of replacing very large trees. <br /> Bollis stated that it would be difficult to get that equipment in within 75 feet of the lake. <br /> Libby stated that when the equipment is capable of accessing the area,they can replace the large trees. <br /> Ressler likes the idea of putting a minimum diameter size and asked what size he would propose as the <br /> minimum. <br /> Thiesse suggested 3 inches. <br /> Barnhart stated that he would suggest 1 inch in diameter because some trees, like oak trees,transplant <br /> better when they are smaller. <br /> Libby asked if a 1-inch tree was larger or smaller than a sapling. <br /> Barnhart stated that it was larger than a sapling. <br /> Bollis asked if anyone was in favor of a less than 1:1 ratio. He expressed concern about over foresting the <br /> area. <br /> Barnhart stated that there is language in the ordinance regarding Staff approval. <br /> Ressler stated that if Staff has the ability to intervene then perhaps the Commission doesn't need to be put <br /> in minimum diameter standards. <br /> Curtis stated that the ordinance needs to have a starting point which is doesn't currently have. <br /> Bollis reiterated his question on whether anyone was in favor of a less than 1:1 replacement. He stated <br /> that he could argue in favor of a 50%caliper inch replacement in order to ensure the trees planted will <br /> thrive. He gave the example of cutting down a 30-inch tree and the replacement would be the equivalent <br /> of 15 inches. <br /> Barnhart stated that what he has seen in the past is a tiered system which if it is over a certain amount,the <br /> requirement would be decreased. He stated that he thinks that type of system could be worked into the <br /> ordinance. <br /> Libby asked if Staff could consult with an arborist to make sure they are pursing the correct replacement <br /> level. <br /> Barnhart stated that he would prefer a tiered system as discussed.He stated that this is only talking about <br /> healthy trees that are removed based on convenience. <br /> Libby noted that Staff cannot be an expert in every area and feels that an arborist may be needed. <br /> Barnhart stated that they could contact an arborist,but explained that it is likely that they would not. He <br /> stated that it becomes more of a space issue and he doesn't necessarily want to spend taxpayer money on <br /> Page 26 of 30 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.