Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 16,2005 <br /> • 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3098 City of Orono,Zoning Code Amendment, Continued) <br /> agencies trying to have the logs removed and that she would like some assistance from the City in order <br /> to deal with this situation. <br /> Susan Wilson, 325 South Brown Road, stated they have improved their property considerably and have <br /> taken steps to remove the buckthorn on their property. Wilson noted that buckthorn prevents maple trees <br /> and other native trees from reseeding and that further thought needs to be given to the natural reseeding of <br /> the wooded areas. <br /> Tom Lane, 915 North Brown Road, stated they have attempted to keep the buckthorn under control on <br /> their property but that in his opinion the requirement of a permit for removal within 75 feet of the <br /> shoreline is excessive. <br /> Gaffron indicated the City encourages removal of buckthorn and other invasive or exotic plant species, <br /> but noted if that happens within the first 75 feet of the lakeshore, it is necessary to obtain a permit. <br /> Gaffron stated the City has experienced a number of situations where a property owner has stripped the <br /> area near the shoreline clear, which creates issues with erosion. Gaffron stated buckthorn has essentially <br /> taken over some portions of the lakeshore and that there needs to be some procedures in place for the <br /> proper removal of buckthorn and other invasive species and for restoration of the shoreline. <br /> Lane suggested individual areas should be reviewed rather than making the ordinance so broad. Lane <br /> stated the City has been negligent in the past along North Brown Road by failing to maintain the ravine <br /> and failing to properly clear the culverts out on a regular basis. Lane concurred that additional thought <br /> should be given to the amendment. <br /> An unidentified resident stated Long Lake Creek was originally a ditch that was dug out by the WPA a <br /> number of years ago. <br /> Kempf inquired what the cost of a permit is for a property owner who wants to remove some buckthorn. <br /> Gaffron stated no fee has been established at the present time since this amendment is still in the concept <br /> stage. <br /> Kempf stated the comments of the residents are well taken but pointed out that the land near the <br /> watershed district are sensitive areas and need to be dealt with appropriately. Kempf stated the <br /> amendment requests that property owners submit plans showing what their intentions are regarding the <br /> vegetation in that area prior to removing anything,noting that not all residents are as sensitive to the <br /> environment as they could be. <br /> Jurgens stated he is in agreement with Kempf and that the amendment has been written for people who <br /> are not aware of the issues concerning the removal of vegetation along the lakeshore. Jurgens stated the <br /> City is limited on how to deal with removal of vegetation within 75 feet of the shoreline and that this <br /> amendment helps give the City some guidance on how to handle violations. Jurgens pointed out the <br /> majority of the restoration items relate to violations of the amendment. <br /> PAGE 4 <br />