12-10-1975 Special Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING HELD EECBffiER 10, 1975 - PAGE 5 into the enviromnental assessment previously filed so that the environmental assessment submitted to the Federal Government ^is so amended; (4) A copy of our wetlands ordinance. Ordinance No. 125, the provisions of which must be met by any agency prior to construe tion of any project in Orono; (5) A copy of our comprehensive land use plan which clearly shows this area as a rural residential area not to be developed into lots of less than two acres; (6) A copy of the Orono zoning code map, which clearly shows the area through v4iich this interceptor is proposed to be con structed as two acre rural residential. As noted in the enclosed documents, the City of Orono has been very craicemed in the past and is presently concerned about any developments in the City which does not meet the require ments of ^e land use policies of the City of Orono. The City is unable to reach any meaningful conclusions conceming the proposed interceptor because of the lack of information supplied to the City by the MlCC and because of the short time allowed the City for review of that infoimation which has been i*ecently submitted to the City. A project of this magnitude will have both short term and long term imp^t of great magnitude on the City and it is the City’s responsibility to understand coopletely frcMn a ccm^lete analysis of the proposed project what the con sequences and inpact mi^t be; for the reasons set forth herein, the City has not been able to undertake such an analysis and ibviously must be able to do so. If you have any questions conceming this matter, please feel free to contact liie undersigned. Signed Bruce D. Malkerson, Orono City Attorney. The Council again requested input from everyone conceming the proposed ^iltiple Dwelliiig Ordinance. The procedure was that tiie Mayor read the Ordinance, segment by segment, and discussion followed each portion. The following are pro posed changes dr areas where decisions would have to be made: (1) Under M-6 Purpose: An inclusion to designate that land area planning would be "exclusive of wetlands". (2) The portion conceming Permitted Uses in M-6 Area allowing any permitted use as regulated in the R-IB District: This was an area of contention due to objections to the pos- siblity of six single family units to an acre and the other view, that if in a relatively large area, it would permit flexibility of design. Fears were expressed that this pro- \lsion could lead to having a large area of single family roiv houses and it mss felt this feature was more in line with a hi^ tosity ordinance. An opinion was expressed that the code should include a provision that if a developer was to construct single-family residential homes, the tract ^;ould revert to the original zoning. It was felt by some (^lat the PRD provisions of the Zoning Code would allow for clustered single-family residential units and for greater controls by the City and that the purpose of the proposed code was regulation of attached multiple dwellings. How ever, several felt that a mix of housing types would be desirable and allow a developer flexibility to plan aestetic LETTER TO POLLUTION OOmEDL AGENCY, cent. I •I V. mTIPLE DWELLING 1 i!i; .1