Laserfiche WebLink
9 <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 20, 1997 <br />( #4 - #2294 LGA Investments - Continued) <br />Gaffron reviewed the City Engineer's comments as noted in 1 -4 on page 3 of 9 of the <br />zoning report and Exhibit F. Staff has recommended using directional boring to bring <br />sewer up the hill from Wildhurst Trail during construction. The streets are being <br />proposed as public roads. Gaffron indicated the typical street section indicates a 28' <br />paved roadway. Of specific concern regarding grading, Gaffron said no grading will <br />occur outside specific boundaries but grading will occur for the residences when they are <br />built, and he would like to review how this will be accomplished without affecting the <br />ravines. He indicated the entire drainage of the road segment from Tonkaview north and <br />to the east will be graded to drain northward. The storm sewer plan will result in a slower <br />rate of flow to the southerly ravine by redirecting it to the north. <br />Gaffron reported he has received a number of letters from the public; some of which have <br />suggested an EAW. He said he has reviewed the regulations and concluded that the north <br />and south projects are independent of each other resulting in an EAW not being <br />mandated. Gaffron said neither project is in an exempt category, hence both could be <br />subject to an EAW if ordered by the Council at its discretion. If a group of at least 25 <br />individuals petitions for an EAW, it is still at the Council's discretion whether to order <br />one. Gaffron said the City Council would have to determine whether the information <br />• submitted by individuals supports requiring an EAW. <br />0 <br />Gaffron reported a wetland delineation has been performed. There are three basins, 2 and <br />3 run along the center line of the northern ravine and range 5 -20' in width. Drainage <br />easements will be required. A smaller basin is found in Lot #5 and will be filled tocreate <br />a house pad. The basin appears to have a minimum benefit to the Watershed, and the <br />developer has requested its elimination. These wetlands are not on the City protected list <br />but on the list but require Watershed District review under the Wetland Conservation Act. <br />Gaffron reviewed the revised proposal summary as reported in items 1 -10 on page 5 and <br />6 of the zoning file report. Regarding Park Dedication, as reported in item #6, Gaffron <br />reported the Park Commission recommended cash in lieu of park land dedication. He <br />indicated that the Commission was given the impression that the center line of the <br />drainageway was in this proposed park dedication land and was wider than it actually is. <br />Gaffron showed the location of the proposed park land for dedication and its relationship <br />to Lot 1. He is concerned that without the dedication, the area to the northwest will <br />become part of Lot 1 and potentially result in trees being eliminated and becoming a <br />storage area for the residents. The City would not have the land to incorporate a trail if <br />they so desired in the ravine area. Staff recommends the City take dedication of land as <br />noted. Gaffron distributed a handout showing the parameters of park dedication. <br />11 <br />