My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-20-1998 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1998
>
04-20-1998 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2023 1:14:18 PM
Creation date
7/27/2023 1:06:01 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.
/
356
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 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 16, 1998 <br />ZONING AMENDMENTS <br />(#12) cm' OF ORONO CODE AMENDMENT RE; PARK DEDICA'OON FEE - <br />11:22-11:31 P.M. <br />Gaffron referenced Moorse's memo indicating the City's intent to change the ordinance to <br />reflect the rough proportionality and nexus requirements that have evolved concerning <br />park dedications. Council had asked for a revision. Moorse suggested and Gaffron <br />concurred that minimum and maximum dollar amounts for park dedication (to be <br />established annually) were needed based on the value of park system. The park dedication <br />ordinance was revised in 1989 to 8% of the value of the land of new subdivided lots. This <br />did not take into account the impact per residence on parks, nor did it address <br />proportionality. <br />Gaflfron noted the changes and additions to the code. He indicated the ordinance <br />amendment is not in final form. <br />Stoddard asked how the park dedication has been challenged. Gaffron explained how this <br />has occurred. <br />Gaflfron informed Mabusth that Moorse has concluded through his analysis that the park <br />dedication maximum per lot should be about $4,900. This is iustifled based on park needs <br />and anticipated needs for parks in the future, taking into account the existing park system <br />value and the number of lots exnected to be develooed in the future. <br />Berg noted the current ordinance did not reflect the need for park development and focus <br />was on large lot sizes with need for trails not parks. Gaffron said the nexus shows the <br />connection where bringing more people into the area will result in more use of parks and <br />these people paying their fair share. <br />Mabusth asked if the Park C'^nimission reviewed the amendment. Gaffron said they gave <br />some input and are not tot.'illy pleased with the result but accept the fact that the current <br />ordinance is inadequate. <br />Commissioners felt the amendment issue did not require further review by the <br />Commission. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Stoddard moved. Smith seconded, to approve the Park Dedication Ordinance Amendment <br />subject to minor revisions and legal review prior to Council review. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays <br />0.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.