My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-08-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
11-08-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 3:38:50 PM
Creation date
1/25/2023 2:05:59 PM
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.
/
395
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 CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 25,2004 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT <br />5. #04-3007 HAROLD AND MILDRED BOWER, 1925 LAKEVIEW TERRACE - <br />VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 5237 AND ORDINANCE NO. 20,3'" SERIES <br />Murphy questioned how the application would have been effected if the applicant was required to <br />adhere to the new wetland ordinance, as opposed to the 10 conditions now laid out in the staff <br />recommendations. <br />Gaffron e.xplained that the applicant had Hied his application prior to the new wetland ordinance <br />and to the moratorium on wetland applications. He stated that it would be staffs perspective that <br />the applicant has met the past wetland ordinance requirements for a 26 ’ wetland buffer setback <br />While the applicant might have been granted more flexibility had the application been evaluated <br />upon the new ordinance, which requires a IS' buffer, it would be staffs conclusion that a home <br />could be built without affecting wetlands or drainage on the propert>'. Gaffron noted that the <br />applicant had requested that condition #10 requiring an easement around the ditch for ponding be <br />revised. <br />Bower explained that, in his opinion, the easement requirement for a 35’ wide by 168’ long ditch or <br />pond put substantial hardship upon his request. He pointed out that the engineer’s report indicates <br />ponding would benefit those to the north, though an additional pond to the north would be required <br />at a later date, and thus minimi/e his use of his lot now. <br />Gaffron stated that, according to the stormwater management report, a proposed pond would be <br />built at the north cast comer of County Road 6. Gaffron admitted that the pond might not be a <br />requirement if other tradeoffs could be achieved to help with filtration, such as a natural buffer <br />strip. <br />Mayor Peterson asked whether item #10 could be removed from staffs perspective. <br />Gaffron indicated that the requirement could be removed in lieu of a condition requiring that a <br />natural 5-10’ bufier strip either side of the ditch remain. <br />Bower felt this was a reasonable request. <br />Murphy indicated that he was not in favor of losing trees in order to create a larger pond or ditch on <br />this property, if the property owner was in favor of maintaining a natural buffev area to the ditch. <br />Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 20, Third Series Approving <br />an Amendment of the Orono Wetland Inventory and Classification .Map. VOTE: Ayes 5, <br />Nays 0. <br />Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5237, a Resolution <br />approving a lot area variances subject to the nine conditions identified in the staff report <br />dated October 21, 2004, and that a 5’ natural buffer be maintained on both sides of the ditch. <br />VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0 <br />The applicant mentioned that he was intending to sell the lot. <br />PAGE 3 of 10
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.