My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/17/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
10/17/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2012 9:38:06 AM
Creation date
3/9/2012 9:38:04 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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,October 17,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3131 Steve Bohl,Continued) <br /> Gronberg stated the developer is amenable to any recommendations Staff would have in the way of <br /> landscaping. <br /> Rahn stated in his opinion Staff should review the landscape plan and that he would also prefer that the <br /> Park Commission indicate whether they are in support of the trail extension into the development. <br /> Rahn stated the request for the variance for Lots 7 and 8 would need to be reviewed by the city's wetland <br /> consultant. <br /> Gronberg indicated he used to live across the street from this area and that he knows the history of that <br /> wetland. <br /> Kempf stated he is unsure whether the history would play a big part in determining whether that should be <br /> classified as wetland. Kempf inquired what process should be followed to get a wetland reclassified. <br /> Gaffron stated the City's wetland consultant would review the area and that he would complete a <br /> standardized review of the wetland,reviewing the characteristics of the wetland,and would then <br /> determine what preservation class it would fall into. Gaffron stated the code is set up to allow the <br /> developer's consultant to do an assessment and that the City's consultant could either reject or accept the <br /> applicant's proposal. Gaffron indicated to his understanding the process takes approximately one month. <br /> Kempf stated he would like to see whether the wetland should be reclassified, and that if it were not <br /> reclassified, due to the type of density the City is attempting to achieve in this area,he would not be <br /> opposed to a variance. <br /> Gronberg indicated a number of cities have an averaging feature to the setback for wetlands. <br /> Kempf stated that might not work with buffers. <br /> Leslie indicated he is in agreement of seeing whether this wetland should be reclassified, and if it is not <br /> reclassified, it would be necessary to look at whether there is a hardship to grant a variance. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the City's consultant could take a look at it prior to starting the process to <br /> reclassify it. <br /> Gaffron recommended that John Smythe take a look at the area this week and then speak with the <br /> developer's consultant to see what type of solution could be reached. Gaffron indicated he would prefer <br /> to use averaging when there are no other options and that in this case the developer could reduce the <br /> number of lots to avoid the need for a variance. <br /> Kempf stated in his opinion averaging the setbacks would be confusing to the various property owners. <br /> PAGE 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.