My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-04-2012 Planning Commission Work Session
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2012
>
04-04-2012 Planning Commission Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/15/2021 11:09:37 AM
Creation date
12/15/2021 10:56:53 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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
TO: Planning Commission Members <br /> Ron Moorse, City Administrator <br /> FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator <br /> DATE: April 12, 1994 <br /> SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment - "Top of Bluff" Definition - Public Hearing <br /> List of Exhibits <br /> A - Proposed Ordinance <br /> B - 3/29/94 Letter to DNR <br /> C - Memo and Exhibits of 3/24/94 <br /> This is a public hearing to consider a proposed amendment to the definition of "top of bluff". <br /> The current definition is as follows: <br /> "Top of the bluff" means the higher point of a 50' segment with an average slope <br /> exceeding 18%. <br /> The proposed definition is: <br /> "Top of the bluff" means that point on the cross section of a bluff below which the slope <br /> becomes more than 18% and above which the average slope for a distance of 50' or <br /> more is 18% or less. <br /> The reasons and rationale for this proposed amendment are contained in the March 29, 1994 <br /> letter to Ceil Strauss of the DNR, and in the memo and exhibits to Council of March 24, 1994. <br /> Briefly, the definition of "top of bluff" is used for determining the point at which bluff <br /> protection setbacks are measured. The current definition can result in a setback of up to 70'-80' <br /> from what a rational person would consider the "top" or shoulder of the bluff. The DNR <br /> suggested a "common sense definition" which staff rejects on the basis that it is quite subjective <br /> and not defensible. <br /> The proposed definition developed by staff uses 18% slope as the break point between land that <br /> is bluff and that which is not a bluff. <br /> Staff Recommendation <br /> Please review the attached exhibits. Staff recommends approval of the proposed definition <br /> amendment. <br /> ch ' . / ,9L/ 7 = ra E<tc_c��a,,h�Y,.�:�. ��3e6wAt- Fk' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.