09-19-1988 Planning Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MimiTBS OF THE PLAHHIIIG CONHISSIOH TING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 IJ.-OZONING PILE 81333-REBERS C0NTIN1 Mr. John Shardlow. Indicated that he was not an advocate for the Rebers* proposal. His purpose for attending the meeting was to review the proposal as a Consultant for the City of Orono. This process started with the assumption that the City would look at whether or not the comprehensive plan should be amended first. After the comprehensive plan was in place, it would act on specific requests for rezoning, based upon the conditions and standards established. The Rebers' proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Mr. Shard low said that statement is not an opinion on his part, it is a fact. He was aware of the fact that there were members of the Planning Commission that disagreed with the comprehensive plan. Therefore, if there is opposition to Mr. Rebers* proposed subdivision, it is actually opposition to the comprehensive plan. The "plan” was in place first and Mr. Rebers* developers tailored their proposal to the comprehensive plan. Mr. John Rick, a resident at 730 Dickey Lake Drive, stated that his concern was similar to Mrs. Roderick's in that if the the subdivision were to create a thoroughfare of Dickey Lake Drive, Pine Ridge and the proposed cul-de-sac, there would be a significant public safety issue to be addressed. Mr. Gerald Pettis, another resident of Dickey Lake Drive, stated that he was suspicious of what could potentially happen should Pine Ridge Lane be opened for a firelane. He was concerned about the City going through Dickey Lake Drive for the purpose of installing sewer lines. Mr. Pettis said that he did not have the property to give for the purposes of a sewer line. Chairman Kelley said that was a good point in that was the next logical step should the sewer be expanded to the west. Mr. Pettis also wanted to know if there were proposed covenants for the development. Kelley answered that a letter had been sent setting forth those covenants. Mr. Pettis asked if they were anything like the covenants for Morningside? If so, he would be very concerned about his property if homes of that calibur were to be put in his area. Mr. Robbin Sentell, residing at 736 Dickey Lake Drive, agreed with concerns raised by his neighbors. His main concern was whether any form of traffic regulation had been proposed for Brown Road and Highway 12, should the Rebers* development be approved. Mr. Shardlow responded to Mr. Sentell*s question by stating that one of the mainstays of the xighway 12 Corridor Study is to preclude any direct access from the frontage of Mr. Rebers* property that is currently zoned commercial. There would be an opportunity for local traffic to get across that location without having to go onto Highway 12. The present plan requires the installation of a frontage road before the southern portion of the Rebers* property is developed. Mr. Sentell asked for further Information regarding specific proposed traffic regulations for Brown Road and Highway 12. Mr. Shardlow replied