My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 1298
Orono
>
Resolutions
>
Resolution 0001-7547
>
Reso 1200 - 1299 (September 15, 1980 - July 27, 1981)
>
Resolution 1298
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/12/2015 1:57:30 PM
Creation date
11/12/2015 1:57:30 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
• <br /> � Cit� o� ORONO <br /> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> � NO. ���� <br /> • � • • <br /> II. ANSWERS TO METRO STAFF CON�ERNS <br /> A. The question of how to designate Study Area #2 shoald <br /> not be a major concern for the Metropolitan Council , <br /> but it is a major concern for the City of Orono. <br /> l. Area #2 is a small cl�tster of 12 existing homes. <br /> There is no internal development potential. The <br /> total sewage flow capacity is already available <br /> in the Orono-Lang Lake Interceptor design. <br /> There is no metropolitan impact from sewering <br /> this area. <br /> 2 . Area #2 is a small area along the perimeter of <br /> the metropol.itan urban service fringe. Whether <br /> the MUSA line includes or excludes this area has <br /> no metropolitan significance. <br /> 3. Sewering of Area #2 was ordered to resolve existing <br /> • problem�. If Orono was forced to designate the <br /> area "urban" solely because sewer was available, <br /> poor precedent would be set for requiring the City <br /> (not Metropolitan government) to thereafter pro- <br /> vide all the other typieal urban services even <br /> though none area now required. This would be <br /> practically difficuit and fiscally imprudent. <br /> 4 . Designating Area #2 as ur.ban would constitute <br /> creation of a new urban island disconnected <br /> from other urban service areas. <br /> 5. Designating Area #2 as urban woul.d have grave, <br /> unplanned implications for further urban en- <br /> croachment of the rural area, es:pecialiy tl�e <br /> large undeveloped Gcreage immediately �ast <br /> of Area #2 . The precedent would be difficult <br /> for the City to handle. <br /> B. Orono ' s CMP is internally consistent regarding sewer <br /> service to Area #2 �nd regarding designation of urban <br /> '°islands" within the rural service area, <br /> l. Orono ' s CSPP specifically identifies the four <br /> rural housing clusters along the interceptor <br /> route and the possibility of providing sewer <br /> service to those areas. <br /> 2. Metr� st.aff ' s PDC report, page 5, quotes Orono' s <br /> Rural Sewage Treatment Policy 6 as saying <br /> � municipal sanitary sewer will not bE extended <br /> into the rural area or across open, rural lands . <br /> This is true. Iri the case of Area #2 , municipal <br /> service was not extended. The interceptor already <br /> 7 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.