Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />HELD ON JANUARY 18, 1994 <br />• <br />Commissioner Smith inquired as to what the DNR would look at regarding drainage issues <br />when reviewing this proposal. Mabusth responded that they would review the hydrological <br />information submitted by the developer and potential impact on the DNR park land located <br />downstream, the culverts of Luce Line, and use of the Luce Line bed as a drain. Discussion <br />ensued regarding maintenance of the trails and culverts. Commissioner Nolan inquired about <br />the septic systems located south of the drainage swale and Mr. Gronberg responded that it <br />would be done with PVC pipe which would be under pressure so that if the system failed, it <br />would not pump anything out. Commissioner Nolan commented he believed it could <br />eliminate potential problems if the septic systems were located on the north side of the swale. <br />Mabusth stated that there is not suitable area for another septic system to be located north of <br />the drainageway. <br />Chairman Schroeder inquired about the flag lot issue. Mabusth commented that it is not a <br />variance to create a back lot under the new ordinance criteria. Commissioner Rowlette <br />commented she was concerned about emergency vehicle access and felt that a loop driveway <br />or turn - around should be provided for those lots. <br />Jim Deanovic stated that their restrictive covenants prohibit extra structures on the lots so <br />there will not be a conditional use permit issue. He stated they are willing to construct the <br />bike trail if their cost can be deducted from the park dedication fee. The consensus of the <br />Planning Commission was that the developer should be allowed park dedication credit for the <br />• cost of constructing the bike trails as long as they were public trails. Mabusth reviewed the <br />process whereby the park dedication fees are calculated, based on the land value of the <br />property. <br />Eugene Hite commented that the Countryside homeowners would like to see the lot retained <br />as a park no matter what the determination is regarding its historical status. Chairman <br />Schroeder commented that the Park Commission had no funds available to develop the land <br />as a park. Discussion ensued regarding the potential for a neighborhood park, and the <br />consensus of the Planning Commission was that the parcel remain as a park rather than a lot. <br />Mr. Hite commented that perhaps there was the possibility of holding that property as a <br />common area for the neighborhood, and he requested that he be allowed to discuss this <br />possibility at their homeowner's association meeting. Creative funding methods were <br />discussed. <br />Commissioner Smith inquired about the possibility of providing buffering and screening <br />between Lots 2, 3 and 4 and the Luce Line Trail. Extensive discussion ensued regarding <br />how the City can be protected from difficulties arising from the issue of wetland mitigation <br />when the lots are sold in the future. <br />Discussion ensued regarding whether the roadway should be connected or cul -de -saced on <br />both ends with the potential for future connection being retained. Mabusth reminded the <br />Commission that if the road is not connected, it would continue to be maintained by benefit <br />• lot owners. It will have to be privately maintained until such time as it is connected. <br />Discussion ensued regarding whether to connect the roadway or leave it as two cul -de -sacs <br />3 <br />