Laserfiche WebLink
! <br /> � OROI10 COUIICIL TIEETING HELD NOVEi1BER 8, 1976 <br /> Page 13 <br /> • Certain].y, the proposed Orono-Long Lake interceptor ORONO-LUNG LAKE <br /> �sponsored by the r7etropolitan i4aste Control <br /> ommission falls within the domain of revieca by INTERCEPTOR <br /> � the Planning Commission sinc� a� sanitary sewer �Continued) <br /> system installed within the Orono City limits, <br /> e regardless of purpose, will have a profound effect <br /> on land use. In fact, sanitary sewer has become <br /> � the single factor which will drive ur.ban development <br /> in spite of all other means of control. <br /> � <br /> • i�leans of Controle During the past several years, <br /> Orono has developed a Comprehensive Land Use Plan <br /> � delineating areas of both urban and rural service <br /> area�, Ordinances have been enacted to provide <br /> � for the protection of the general welfare of <br /> the public within these service zones. Th� <br /> • =letropolitan Council has further indicated agreement <br /> with the partitioning of Orono into rural and <br /> � urban service areas by their planning consistent <br /> � with our planning. <br /> � From a land use planning viewpoint, it is incon- <br /> ceivable that installation of a sewer system within <br /> � a designated rural service area would be considered <br /> a protection of_ the general welfare, Regardless <br /> of alleged controls, the tact that the sewer is <br /> there, economic interests will find a way to subvert <br /> � 'ie process of planning and gain access to the <br /> � .,ewer system. Accordingly, it is recomrnenc�.ec� that <br /> Alternatives A, B, C, or D be considered as the only <br /> � acceptable, viable means ot serving the general <br /> welfare. <br /> • <br /> It is noted that other alternatives appear to <br /> � impact our environ*o.ental protection measures <br /> designed to protect Orono wetlands and marsh <br /> � areas. This conflict will be at best difficult <br /> � to resolvee Here again is an excellent example of <br /> how the planning process to protect the fragile <br /> � environment could be subverted in the name of <br /> "environmental protection", Clearly, it is not <br /> i necessary to resort to sketchy quantifications <br /> of environmental impact when relative measures <br /> � of impact of the proposed alternatives are <br /> � c�uite clearo ti7hen the designers and developers <br /> have come and gone, Orono is still left with the <br /> �result of t�e encroachments, Again, froM a <br /> �lanning viewpoint, the Orono Council is hereby <br /> �cautioned not to assume the risk of environmental <br /> damage when alternatives are available which do <br /> �not impact the wetlands, <br /> � e tinal note. Location of the interce�tor <br /> �stem along County Road ##15 is more likel to <br /> serve the public interest in the long run tlian <br /> �would the other alternativese Our experience shows <br /> • <br /> � (Continued) <br />