My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-28-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
06-28-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 12:17:53 PM
Creation date
1/25/2023 10:31:39 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
347
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
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MONDAY, MAY 17,2004 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />Jim Dunn, speaking for Mary Dunn, remarked the agreement has not yet been reached as Mr. Lazniarz stated. <br />It is under cot«ideration and not yet signed. <br />Chair Mabusth asked for further public comments. <br />Mrs. Coleman asked for further confirmation that there the houses proposed will be 50' back from her property <br />line. Mr. Lazniarz responded that the setback is 50' but the houses will not be positioned at the setback, <br />resulting in potentially more distance, up to about 100' to the Coleman's property line because the houses will <br />be closer to the proposed street. <br />Chair Mabusth closed the public hearing. <br />Chair Mabusth led the Planning Commission is discussion of the following Issues for Consideration: <br />1. Does the Planning Commission agree with the use of the PEUD subdivision method for this <br />property? It was a consensus that the PRD subdivision method should be used for this property. <br />2. Should the areas to be preserved via conservation easements, be in an Outlot, or merely as an <br />easement within each individual property? Chair Mabusth commented that to be consistent with prior <br />Planning Commission decisions, outlots owned by a homeowners association were created. Caffron concurred <br />and explained that in standard subdivision plats usually individual lots were created with a wetland easement. <br />He advised that within an outlot the City can put whatever conditions/easements is deemed necessary. Bremer <br />asked for information about why not have an outlot versus individual lot ownership; Gaffron responded that <br />with a homeowner's association managing an outlot there is greater recreations use by more people than if it is <br />individually owned and had potential trespass issues. <br />Bremer commented that she would not support a path to the Luce Line Trail. <br />Chair Mabusth concurred with Bremer and thought there may be problems with people trespassing from the <br />Luce Line Trail into the subdivision area. She suggested the Parks Commission should look at the proposed <br />plan prior to Planning Commissioa action to ascertain if they have an interest in a walkmg access to the creek <br />and its existing bridge. <br />Mr. Van Eeckhout inteijected that in the winter siders use die land but in die summer there are very few. <br />Page SO ofS8
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.