My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Project Packet
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
B
>
Bayside Road
>
4645 Bayside Road - 06-117-23-22-0009
>
Land Use
>
13-3630, VAR
>
Project Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/20/2025 1:09:12 PM
Creation date
11/20/2025 1:08:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, September 16, 2016 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. <br />Carolyn Meyers stated she owns the property behind this new development. Meyers stated she has a <br />concern because Bayside Meadows is above the wetlands and having fewer trees is not to the advantage <br />of any kind of runoff or water absorption. There is now 1.65 acres that is now impermeable and that <br />adding trees, not subtracting trees would be more advantageous since they would help absorb the water. <br />Pat Thull, 210 North Shore Drive, stated she has a couple of issues. Thull indicated their property is <br />located on the south side of the development and look down on the site. <br />Thull stated when she was in attendance at the last meeting, the application was pretty much in place and <br />that there were two acre lots being proposed, which is not really typical for this area. The area is more <br />rural and consists of woods, waterways, and wetlands. Thull stated she does not have an objection to <br />development of the property but that she would have had issue with the number of houses being built on <br />the site. <br />Thull stated the plan depicted a buffer along one area of trees and currently there is not a single tree in <br />that buffer line. That issue was discussed in the last meeting and it was agreed that trees would be placed <br />in that area. Thull stated the five trees being proposed are not adequate because it was agreed by the <br />Planning Commission that the tree line in the buffer area should replicate the general current tree line and <br />that it should be conducive to the natural environment and look of the area. The layout of the homes is <br />not natural and appears odd looking. <br />Thull stated the other issue deals with the wetland. The wetland was reclassified which allows for closer <br />infringement in the wetland area and takes away from the natural environment. Thull stated removing <br />additional trees does not make sense, does not retain the natural environment and that she would prefer to <br />see more trees rather than fewer trees. Thull indicated she agrees with Caroline Meyers as it relates to the <br />additional runoff going into the wetlands. <br />Carol Pass, 235 North Arm Lane, stated their property is probably the one that is most impacted by this <br />development. The whole southern and eastern border with the exception of one area is connected to their <br />property. Pass indicated they created a conservation easement across their southern border of their <br />Page 27 of 51 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.