My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-13-2015 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
07-13-2015 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2015 9:53:56 AM
Creation date
10/1/2015 9:52:55 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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 COUNCIIL MEETING <br />Monday, July 13, 2015 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />Senior Planner Gaffron noted this is the City Council's first review of the preliminary plat for the parcel <br />of land located at 300 Sixth Avenue North. The applicant is proposing a subdivision to create 11 new lots <br />out of approximately 95 acres. There would be two new roads in the subdivision. The Planning <br />Commission reviewed this application and held public hearings at its May 18 and June 15 meetings. On <br />May 18, the Planning Commission tabled the application, requesting that the applicant provide additional <br />information regarding the tree preservation covenant limitations that would be placed on individual lots as <br />well as more detail regarding the future intent for preservation of the prairie areas. <br />On June 15, the Planning Commission reviewed a revised lot layout (Plan B) and voted 6 to 0 to <br />recommend approval of the application as revised, with conditions. At both public hearings there was a <br />considerable amount of discussion from the public and the neighborhood about what they feel should be <br />preserved. Gaffron stated there was a good discussion at those meetings about whether it is more <br />important to preserve the prairie areas or the Big Woods. <br />Gaffron indicated Staff's report contains a fair amount of information and that he would like to turn it <br />over to George Stickney, the proposed developer of the property, to provide some background on the <br />application and what he is currently proposing. <br />George Stickney, BPS Properties, stated in his view both plans that were submitted are great. Stickney <br />stated throughout the whole process the goal has been to meet the seIler's vision for the property. <br />Stickney stated his reason for bringing a different plan to the City Council was to address the comments <br />raised at the May 18 meeting. The revised plan has removed one of the proposed lots from the Big <br />Woods area and added it to the prairie area abutting Hunter Drive. <br />Stickney stated when he first developed this plan, it had four lots with the backs of the homes facing the <br />prairie. Stickney stated he did not present that plan and that he revised it to have the homes more hidden <br />in the woods. Stickney stated in creating this subdivision, he went through every possible option to locate <br />a septic, a driveway, house, and preserve as many trees as possible. <br />Stickney stated Diagram No. 2 consists of Block 1, Lot 1; Lot 2 of Block 2; and Lots 1 and 2 of Block 3. <br />The driveways have been changed to be south of the septic locations. Stickney stated all of the driveways <br />are perfectly located and that he has created a new driveway that lost one less tree on the way to Lot 7. <br />Stickney noted the covenants protect the trees and that the proposed driveway only loses one tree. <br />Stickney stated in the area of the cul-de-sac, there is an Outlot B that travels approximately 125 feet to get <br />to Lot 2, Block 2, and that he only loses three trees over six inches. Stickney indicated as a developer <br />they would construct the road and the driveway to ensure they are located in the right place. <br />Stickney stated the most sacred trees are on the north side of Lot 7 and that no one is going to be able to <br />propose a house on the north side of Lot 7. Stickney stated his plan depicts the building envelopes and <br />that those were not depicted in the plan that was presented on May 18. Stickney noted maximum tree <br />preservation zones have been created along with penalty clauses and that every property owner in this <br />development has to replace any trees at a 2:1 ration. Stickney stated under Plan A they would have lost <br />around 130 trees out of 1,430 trees. As it relates to mature trees that are in excess of 22 inches in <br />diameter and over 75 years old, nine total trees will be lost. <br />Diagram No. 3 depicts the building envelopes. Stickney noted they are still preserving 150 feet of buffer <br />along the prairie grass on Lots 1 and 2 and have created a 30 -foot setback to preserve prairie grass around <br />the perimeter as well as a 45 -foot setback to the south. On the wooden lots, Stickney indicated they <br />Page 7 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.