Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Tuesday,January 21,2014 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> subject to the floodplain or flood fringe standards. Staff does not have enough detail at this point to know <br /> whether or not that slab will be at existing grade at 930.2' or where it is going to be. That additional data <br /> will need to be submitted before a permit can be issued. <br /> Gaffron indicated the applicant will also need to define the parking. If the tank and the slab will reduce <br /> the number of parking stalls, that impact will need to be discussed. Gaffron stated all Staff has at the <br /> moment is a conclusion by the applicant and no other information to go on that there will not be any <br /> parking impacts and that the slab will be at grade. <br /> Thiesse asked if it is Staffs direction that this is only a mechanical permit, it is only for the gas tank, and <br /> only for the parking over the gas tank,with the other issues being off the table at this point. <br /> Gaffron stated that is essentially correct. <br /> Schoenzeit commented if there was an engineering drawing depicting the elevations and it was shown to <br /> be above grade,that would change the discussion considerably. Schoenzeit stated the Planning <br /> Commission may want to say that their approval or recommendation is based on this being at grade, and <br /> if an engineering drawing is not received, the Planning Commission is no longer approving that design <br /> Gaffron stated that would suggest the Planning Commission would need to see it again. Gaffron stated in <br /> his view, if there continues to be a lack of information, it is something that should come back before <br /> either the Planning Commission or City Council. <br /> Thiesse noted there are a couple of months before the installation would start. <br /> Kujawa stated all the discussions with the contractor were that it would be at grade and that everything <br /> has been designed to make sure it was a concrete slab that would not impact parking. Kujawa stated if it <br /> does impact parking, in his view it would be fair to bring it back. If it ends up where there are two or <br /> three inches of fill above the current grade,then the Watershed District would need to approve it. <br /> Thiesse stated he would prefer to have all the information showing the elevations and everything else <br /> rather than the applicant needing to come back in May when he finds out it does not work. <br /> Schoenzeit stated in his view the drawing requires an engineer stamp on it to make sure it works the way <br /> it is proposed. Schoenzeit stated in his view the Planning Commission needs additional documentation <br /> to be sure this can be built the way it is proposed. <br /> Thiesse asked if the Planning Commission is okay with sinking a gas tank eight feet below the water table <br /> near the lake. Thiesse commented the Planning Commission is the keepers of the lake, and even though it <br /> appears the Watershed District and the LMCD are saying it is okay, don't worry, he is worried about the <br /> impacts. Thiesse questioned how long the tanks will last and whether they are a potential risk. <br /> Gaffron stated the other option is to do an above ground vault system, which would have site impacts in <br /> terms of location and visual impacts. Gaffron indicated he does not know whether it would cost more or <br /> less than what is being proposed but noted it is not what the applicant is asking for. <br /> Page 20 of 26 <br />