My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-18-1996 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
03-18-1996 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/10/2019 2:03:21 PM
Creation date
7/10/2019 2:03:21 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 <br />(#6 - #2114 Clark Winslow - Continued) <br />Mabusth said she, as well as the DNR, question what is lacking in the design that creates <br />the need to redredge. Gustafson said the problem arose from construction; and with the <br />property to the side now in turf and plantings, he does not expect the problem to arise as <br />frequently. <br />Mabusth questioned the lack of wetland vegetation. Gustafson said the vegetation has <br />disappeared, but the purpose of the pond is to maintain open water. Mabusth did note <br />that the original intent of the pond was to rid the area of odors and algae. Mabusth asked <br />if the intent in opening up more open water area was to gain any vegetation. Gustafson <br />said cattails could be replanted if the City would desire the maintenance of vegetation. <br />Hawn later asked if the owner would approve cattail planting. Gustafson said it would be <br />done if it was necessary. <br />Peterson said he normally would prefer a pond to remain natural and be opposed to open <br />water. With how this pond sits in the neighborhood, Peterson said it would be consistent <br />to maintain the pond as open water. He would like to see cattails planted on the south <br />side. <br />Schroeder questioned the amount of dredging and the depth with relation to vegetation. <br />• Gustafson said the depth would reflect on the slope of the pond. Gustafson said a 8:1 or <br />10.1 slope was necessary to allow emergent vegetation around the perimeter. <br />The property location to the lake and the effect of pond runoff was considered. The <br />culvert was said to be functioning. Peterson questioned the sprinkler running from the <br />lake. Gustafson said the sprinkler is there to add water from the lake to the pond to <br />maintain the water level, if necessary, but added that it was not used. Mabusth noted that <br />this was never approved nor addressed in the original application. <br />Hawn commented on the smell from the pond on the neighborhood necessitating the need <br />to maintain more open water. She suggested a design be drawn to allow aquatic <br />vegetation on the south side. Gustafson said it would be helpful to have dimensions if this <br />was necessary. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Hawn moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2114 for conditional use <br />permit and variance to permit the dredging and removal of 80 c.y. of spoils with the <br />establishment of a high water level for said pond. The slope of the pond is to be <br />maintained at a 8:1 slope with reimposition of aquatic and wetland vegetation in the area <br />of the excavation. Vote: Ayes S, Nays 0. <br />• <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.