06-19-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 15, 1995 (#3 - #2022 Robert Melamed - Continued) Duke Hust, who lives two lots north of the proposed developmeiit, reported that the hike trail would come vwy dose to his home. Host’s house is bu^ dose to the road and would lose his fiont yard. He does not object to the plan except for the proposed trail. Bridget Hust, 820 Old Crystal Bay Road, voiced concern over loss of taD trees where the trail is proposed. Hust noted that the trail would come within Iff of her * It was noted that the Park Commission had voted against a trail on the west side, 3/2, but the Council was in favor of the trail at this location Nolan asked if the concern was that trail connections might not be made if buih on the east dde of this proposed development, which Mabusth confirmed. Melamed noted that no connection would be made to the north unless Hust or Ellis should subdivide their property or it was actfuired by the City. Hust agreed that this was a concern. Flint said that this was a matter of two decisions; whether to take an easement now or build the trail now There is no plan to build now but it wu the appropriate time to gain an easement. The possibility of having a trail on the cast side and being unable to connect to the cast was a concern as well as being obtrusive with the park. Peterson said dedsioes made at this meeting would not affect the trail issue as it will be resolved by the final decision of the Council. Goetten responded that it was not the intention of the Council to extend Ac trail to NorA ShoreDrive. At this time, the trail is not yet able to reach the Luce Line. Inregardsto fhif fpfffjfic application, Goetten said that nothing has been absohitdy decided upon, and it will come up before the Council at a later date. The Council asked the Park Commisnoo to look at a trail on Ae west. Goetten imted that the Coum^ has never condemned a property for the trail. The Council will look further into this issue. Peterson ask^ for any further public comments. Hust commented that he agreed whh the letter noted above. Ellis inquired about the size of Ac City-owned driveway. Melamed commented that it was his goal that the development would look like it was not even there fi-om the road. Melamed does not wiA to disturb the wooded landscape. Nolan asked if restrictive covenants would be placed on tree removal. Melamed said this would be accompiiAed through covenants or conservation easements. The restricted areas would correspond to the building setbacks. The purpose is to create a border on each lot that eliminates any tree removal. I