Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD OCTOBER 25, 1993 <br />ZONING FILE #1877 CONT. <br />Mr. Putnam gave a brief description of the parcels and Mrs. Dickey talked about the historical <br />significance of the site <br />Kelley asked if the barn would come down and if not, is it structurally sound. <br />Jabbour asked if anyone from the Native American organizations have reviewed the plans and <br />approved them. <br />Mrs. Dickey replied that they had. <br />Kelley asked if the land would be deeded to the City of Orono. <br />Mrs. Dickey replied that it would. <br />Mr. Putnam talked about the various ideas regarding roads platted in the developments. There <br />was discussion by all members regarding these roads and the mature woods on the Coffin <br />property. <br />Jabbour stated that he would like more information and input from the Native American <br />community. <br />Sandra Smith. Planning Commission, commented that the Planning Commission suggested a <br />meeting with individuals representing the Native American community to review plans to be <br />sure that their input would he included. <br />Mr. Putnam reviewed the wetland issues regarding each property. He hired a .specialist to do <br />a wetland studv on the Coffia'Dickey properties and presented a map indicating the wetlands <br />(using rules of other agencies) and setbacks per Orono ordinances. The results of the <br />wetlands and setbacks pose a serious problem in the usefulness of the parcels. <br />Gaffron noted that the code required a 75 ’ setback for septic purposes. He indicated that 75 ’ <br />setbacks may not be appropriate, necessary or justified in relation to Type 1 wetlands. He <br />went c I the discuss mitigation matters. <br />There was some discussion as to where mitigation should be done. <br />Hurr and Jabbour felt mitigatior should be done on site. <br />Gaffron commented that Orono has in the past allowed Type 1 wetland as dry buildable, and <br />that in the City’s 1975 maps many Type 1 wetlands were not delineated nor protected, the <br />problem is to primarily determine whether lype 1 s should be considered diy buildable, and <br />secondly mitigation issues. <br />Jabbour asked for llie staffs position regarding type 1 wetland setbacks. <br />Gaffrtm stated the City should recognize and define Type 1 vvetlands to be consistent ^'i^h <br />other agencies but that there is perhaps no justification to cntorce a /5 septic system setback <br />from a Type 1 wetland. Gal Iron lelt that mitigation should be dt>nc up front to protect future <br />residents from ha\ing to deal with the issue individually.