Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 16,2009 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3164 CITY OF ORONO, CONSERVATION DESIGN ORDINANCE, CONTINUED) <br /> develop in the future but does open up some opportunities and provides a mechanism to preserve some of <br /> the items that the City feels are worth preserving. <br /> Haskamp stated she understands the difference between wanting to improve something of a lower quality, <br /> which is not something they are arguing,but that they have concerns on how the classifications of levels <br /> one,two and three are applied on a property and who will determine what level the property is. The <br /> reason for using the MLCCS is that it is a technical, scientific way to identify the natural resources on a <br /> properiy and is a well accepted way of classification. Haskamp stated in her view there is a disconnect <br /> between what the City is attempting to achieve with the levels. Haskamp asked whether there will be <br /> guidelines established to determine what level should be applied to a property. <br /> Gaffron stated the process requires the developer to have a consultant who is schooled in natural <br /> resources to create a conservation master design plan,which would define for the City and the developer <br /> what the categories should be and why. The conservation master design plan would then be reviewed by <br /> the City's consultants and discussions would be had if there are disagreements. Gaffron noted the City <br /> has had at least three or four developments go through the conservation master design process in the past <br /> and the City was able to arrive at a mutual solution fairly easily. Gaffron stated he does not feel it is a <br /> major issue but that he would be willing to look at the report that Ms.Haskamp submits. <br /> Gaffron stated the Planning Commission has the option to either table the ordinance or move it forward to <br /> the City Council. <br /> Haskamp expressed concern that there will be some confusion with the ordinance. Haskamp stated the <br /> MLCSS is an accepted way to classify properties and that in her view under this ordinance there are some <br /> inconsistencies in how it all connects with each other. By requiring a natural resource consultant to <br /> identify what level a property is further demonstrates the need to utilize the MLCCS,which would not <br /> require additional monies to be spent by the developer since it is funded by tax dollars. <br /> Kang requested Ms. Haskamp include other similar cities that have utilized the MLCCS in their <br /> ordinances. <br /> Haskamp indicated the City of Edina is in the process of looking at a similar process at the present time <br /> and they are looking at using the MLCCS. There are also several cities located in Washington County <br /> that are using the MLCCS. <br /> Schoenzeit asked whether Ms.Haskamp's concerns relate more to the implementation of the ordinance <br /> rather than the content of the ordinance. <br /> Haskamp stated they are related to the process and objectivity of the ordinance. <br /> Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 6:54 p.m. <br /> Kang indicated she is open to looking at a report submitted by Ms.Haskamp. <br /> Schoenzeit stated he does not feel the additional time requested by Ms.Haskamp will negatively impact <br /> the situation. <br /> Page 4 <br />