Laserfiche WebLink
MYNUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMIIIISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 18,2015 <br /> 6:30 o'ctock p.m. <br /> Stickney stated Example 3 is in his covenant�. In that example,the yard space is 0.57 of an acre and that <br /> someone will not come in and ask to clear out an acre or else they will spend�50,000 on trees if thoy do <br /> that. Stickney stated that is why there is a strict tree preservation plan,which will protect against that. <br /> Lemke asked if the covenant would be a legal document. <br /> Stickney stated it is and that it would be filed with the property. Stickney st$ted every homeowner will <br /> see it before they purchase the property and it wilt be�led at the time of final plat. <br /> Gai�'ron aslced who will be enforcing tt�e covenarxt. <br /> Sticlmey indicated he would be along with the homeowners association. <br /> Gaffron asked if tt�e homeowners association can changa those covenant�in the future. <br /> Stickney stated that is a good thought and that could be added. Sticlrney srated they would be hurting <br /> themselves if they did that. <br /> Schcenzeit commentad covenants typically fail the second time around. <br /> Gaf&on asked if Mr. Stickney would be willing to put additional restrictions around the perimeters of <br /> specific lots. Gaf�'ron notod the development of the Lakeview Golf Course does not allow developmettt <br /> of any sort to happen within certain conservation areas. Gaffron stated the concern here is that there is a <br /> potential for an individual homeowner to do something different than what is in the covena.IIts,and that if <br /> the covenants can be changed at wil�without input from the City, one of the ways to avoid that issue is to <br /> place a provision in the covenant to prevent that which would give the City so�ane enforcement power. <br /> Stickney noted his covenants on Lot 5 prevent building in the existintg tree arca. Stickney atafed he could <br /> b�ing to the Council the general builc}ing zones for Lots 1,2, 6,and 7. <br /> Gaffron noted he did something similar to that on Graham Hill,and that he is suggesting it might be <br /> appropriate in this case. <br /> Sticlrney stated he is protecting the trees,which was the intent of the covenant, and that he would need <br /> some flexibility 2n the house pads if that provision is included. Stickney noted he has reduced the <br /> building areas since he first proposed the sketch plan. <br /> Landgraver stgted if the cavenants can be changed by a majority vote of the homeowners at a future date, <br /> making it spec�c to eack lot would carry a lot of weight� <br /> Stickney stated in the Big Woods area that would mako sense. <br /> Landgraver noted the trees will be relevant to some of the properties and the other propeiiy owners may <br /> choose to change that Landgraver stated nobody wants the tt�ees cut down,so incorporating it in at the <br /> lot level makes a whnle lat of sense. <br /> Sticl�ey stated he is all ears and that it sounds like a gooc3 plan. <br /> Page 20 of 37 <br />