Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 18,2013 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Gaffron indicated the outlot is the piece going from Lot 2 down to Watertown Road. There is no outlot <br /> continuing further north up to the road itself. Gaffron indicated a trail in that area could be one use of that <br /> corridor. <br /> Thiesse stated if he can meet the criteria of the City,he would prefer that it is not a formal trail. Thiesse <br /> noted it will be a piece of property that you can walk along and is an easy way of meeting the criteria <br /> without doing more than that. If the City can obtain a conservation easement with an easement accessing <br /> that,then the applicant does not need to do any more. <br /> Leskinen asked if there is also a piece that would be given to the Martins. <br /> Abbott stated the Martins,who own the non-addressed piece of this development, live adjacent to <br /> Outlot A. The agreement is if it is not needed for the development,that land would be given to them. If <br /> there is a walking easement, it would go to them with the walking easement. <br /> Leskinen and Schwingler indicated they are fine with that arrangement. <br /> Gaffron stated one of the questions to be addressed is whether or not the Planning Commission is satisfied <br /> with the 25-foot setback or whether the developer should meet a 50-foot setback. Gaffron indicated for a <br /> collector road and a side yard,the standard is 50 feet. <br /> Thiesse asked what the intent of the setback was. <br /> Gaffron indicated it likely was to provide some separation from a collector road and that there is a <br /> potential to have a trail in that area at some point. <br /> Thiesse stated if the setback is 50 feet,there is a potential for losing two lots, which would likely cause <br /> some of the other homes to be constructed larger and not meet the intent of the development. <br /> Gaffron stated as it relates to Item B, substandard width for Lots 3,4, and 5,Mr.Abbott has suggested <br /> that they have some flexibility for Lots 3 and 4. Gaffron noted snow will need to be piled somewhere and <br /> the City will need to deal with that. <br /> Leskinen indicated she would like to see the homes pushed back as much as possible or staggered. <br /> Leskinen noted the applicant has indicated he would like to incorporate that somewhat to give a little <br /> character to the neighborhood. If the homes are pushed back on Lots 4 and 5, it would also help alleviate <br /> some of the parking concerns. <br /> Gaffron indicated the Planning Commission could require a greater front setback for those lots. As it is <br /> currently depicted, Lot 3 has a garage approximately 30 feet back and Lot 4 has a garage that appears to <br /> be at the 25-foot line. Lot 5 is approximately 100 feet back. <br /> Thiesse noted there is also the 75-foot triangle on the southerly side that no one would be using. The <br /> three homes are fairly tight together and then there is an empty spot which would provide some snow <br /> storage. <br /> Page 15 of 35 <br />