My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-13-2003 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2003
>
10-13-2003 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/8/2023 3:02:48 PM
Creation date
2/8/2023 3:01:04 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
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 \EETING <br />Monday, September 15,2003 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />StaH recommend5 approval of extension of the timeframe for applicant to meet die <br />conditions of approval of Resolution No. 4845 to December 31, 2004; and recommends <br />approval of an amendment of the existinj; CUP to allow for interim use of fencing in lieu <br />of berms and vegetation along the north and northeast sides of the paricing lot, per <br />^pUcants stated amendment language subject to the following condition: <br />1.The berm and plantings shall be required at such time that the applicants* issues <br />with the MCWD are resolved. <br />Johnson explained that the site was an environmental contamination site, which Moiries <br />had no connection with, but might be forced to mediate. Since the time of the original <br />approvals, MCWD has identified 5 new wetlands on the south side which were original <br />drainage ditches and must be mediated. While Morries had hoped they would not have to <br />excavate and disturb the contamination site, they plan to work with the MCWD to resolve <br />the issues and complete their site plan work within the next 16 months as originally <br />envisioned. <br />Hawn asked if the proposal would be revised to include the berms at that time. <br />Johnson stated that they had hoped that, if they followed the letter of the code by installing <br />the opaque fencing, they might be relieved from the requirement to install the benns. <br />Chair Smith asked what the timeline f,i>t completion might be. <br />Johnson stated that it war their intention to pull peraiits by December 31,2004. <br />Gaffron stated that, as part of the CUP, the City gave Morries permission to put in lots'in <br />particular places if they put in the landscape berms and screening. WTiile he agreed that <br />the fencing offered an interim solution, Gaffron suggested that the applicants be required to <br />construct the berms once they have worked out their problems with the MCWD, especially <br />PAGE 32 of 35 <br />i <br />ir
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.