Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,October 15,2018 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Landgraver stated he does not feel the Planning Commission should put a number on it,and the <br /> interesting point that was brought up here from the neighbors was put the density elsewhere. The idea of <br /> going to the Comprehensive Plan meeting and talking about it would be very helpful. <br /> Thiesse indicated he is not in favor of increasing the density on this site given the view shed from County <br /> Road 6 and Jamestown and because it is a pristine area. Thiesse indicated he would rather see six or <br /> seven houses. Thiesse stated what is being proposed is way too much. <br /> Erickson stated he has seen townhouse projects at seven to ten units per acre that are heavily wooded,and <br /> that he would not want the Planning Commission to set an exact number tonight. As the discussion goes <br /> forward, however,they should think about a tree inventory or visual representations of how the building <br /> or buildings would look relative to saving as many trees as possible, especially around the periphery of <br /> the site. <br /> Lemke noted higher density does not necessarily mean an ugly project and that someone could put up <br /> seven really ugly homes. Lemke stated he would like to see a little higher density but that it should be <br /> thoughtfully done,with consideration of the views across the lake, and that in his view this is too much. <br /> Olson stated he echoes that comment a little bit. Olson stated the one thing he has noticed is that <br /> developers should want to have the support of the neighbors and the community on any project they do, <br /> which will be a difficult piece in this situation. Given the proposed height and density, in his view it <br /> would not be successful and that he would encourage the developer to take the residents' comments to <br /> heart. <br /> Libby commented the developer needs to be very conscious and sensitive to the environmental impacts <br /> and that the loss of legacy trees will impact everyone. Libby encourage the developer to be sensitive to <br /> the neighbors' comments. <br /> Ressler stated it is pretty clear the proposed height and density is bad. Since the site is zoned for <br /> development,there will probably be something there at some point. It could either be seven ugly homes <br /> with 30-foot roof heights or it could be something else. Ressler stated the visibility of whatever is there <br /> will play a strong role in how it is considered. <br /> Thiesse stated the last issue for consideration is whether the Planning Commission supports the <br /> modification of the zoning ordinance, and from the comments so far, it sounds like the Planning <br /> Commission is,to some degree, in favor of modification to support some type of development. <br /> Landgraver asked what the next step in the process is. <br /> Barnhart stated the next step is the City Council will receive the comments of the Planning Commission <br /> and then review it on November 13,which is a Tuesday. If the developer wants to proceed forward, he <br /> would submit a preliminary plat,which will take some time to put together. Barnhart indicated <br /> concurrently Staff could incorporate this project into the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Amendment. <br /> Landgraver noted the Comprehensive Plan meeting is an opportunity for the public to have input into the <br /> density. <br /> The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item. <br />