Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON MARCH 31, 1997 <br />CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING <br />• SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB <br />Braman indicated that the elimination of the buffer on wetland #12 would require more fill <br />and defeat the reason for the buffer in preserving the wetland or make it too narrow for a <br />ball to land. He indicated the distance between the two wetlands is about 100'. <br />Wiese said if the road was not in this location, the hole could be moved back. He <br />indicated more space is necessary to advance the ball, and it is their attempt to eliminate <br />the awkwardness of having longer shots after the original tee shot. <br />Smith inquired of the response from the Met Council regarding the EAW. Gaffron read <br />their response as noted on page 2 of the March 31 memo, item #18, specifically, water <br />quality and surface water runoff. Gaffron noted that the incorporation of NURP basins <br />into the project is being done and the adoption of the best management practices is a <br />• <br />requirement of the City. The Met Council indicated the change in one acre of wetland is <br />�l Y g c <br />created by the use. It was questioned what the response would be if the application was <br />for a subdivision. <br />Braman informed McMillan that wetland #5 is the only irrigation pond and would require <br />being dug deeper. <br />Gaffron indicated the property owner on the north end of the project, Mr. Krueger, has <br />responded to the EAW and voiced concern with what effect changes to wetland # 17 will <br />have on his wetlands. 0affron said the applicant should address what this issue. Braman <br />said they were in the process of studying the issue. Hunter noted one remedy might be <br />control of the outlet but explained that this would decrease the amount of mitigation. He <br />noted it would also 4pq the water quality into Long Lake. <br />