Laserfiche WebLink
6-3-99 Sewer Policies Work Session <br />May 27, 1999 <br />Page 2 <br />B. Use of the alternate site may requ *e the removal of a substantial number of trees, <br />significantly changing the character of individual lots and potentially that of the <br />neighborhood. <br />C. The one-time cost of sewer provides a permanent solution vs. the potential of future <br />replacement of the new septic system. <br />4.Provision of sewer to an existing Rural Area neighborhood of substandard lots will qqI result <br />in a rezoning of the neighborhood so that the zoning standards will match the existing lot <br />sizes. <br />5.Proximity of undeveloped land to an existing sewer system may result in development with <br />sewer if conditions warrant and the developer wants sewer, but the land must still be <br />developed under rural zoning standards. <br />6.Orono's Urban Area and Rural Area should each be defined by their allowed density of <br />development, not by whether they are provided with sewer. <br />7.Similarly, the ability to accomplish on-site sewage treatment by future methods which do not <br />require large lot sizes, is qqI a reason to allow smaller lot sizes in the rural zone. <br />Despite Orono's long-standing plan to not sewer the Rural Area, we do expect pressure for this to <br />occur. This pressure will likely come from residents who, when faced with the prospect of having <br />to replace their septic system, will view City sewer as a better option. Attached to this memo is a <br />short discussion about how we got to where we are, what new things might be facing us, and <br />suggesting some priorities for expanding the sewer .system, i.e. creating a plan for dealing with this <br />pressure. <br />j