Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,May 18,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> homeowners on the Orono Orchard Road side will want so there is privacy for both properties. They will <br /> do landscape plans per lot as they do design-builds on each lot. <br /> Kelly Lowe, 105 Orono Orchard Road, said she would like to reiterate that considering they had a <br /> relationship with Mr. Quinlivan and he built the three-car garage/carriage house they have, she is <br /> incredibly disappointed that she found out about the four lots by pulling up the agenda today. She knows <br /> Barnhart is probably sick to death of her and her husband checking in with him every month to see what <br /> is going on behind them. She knows they have been a thorn in his side,but there should be proactive <br /> communication to who will be the most visible neighbor. She is heartsick that after 16 years, she is not <br /> going to see the beautiful Orono Preserve behind them. She has concerns about the amount of hardcover <br /> on the road so close to the creek. She is not smart enough to understand,when Mr. Quinlivan says <br /> something about wells/drainage, what it means. She is not a builder; she does not pretend to be one. She <br /> wants to make sure the hardcover does not impact the creek or any drainage to their property. When Mr. <br /> Quinlivan says"placeholder,"right behind their house may be the most buildable spot,and she is <br /> concerned about the value of their home. She reminded everyone that first they had a motorcycle shack <br /> and they poured over$1.2 million into their property and continue to do landscaping and keep it as lovely <br /> as they can based on their budget. They will lose significant value if they get somebody dropped into their <br /> backyard and would be disappointed. She asked when the conversation happens about where all of the <br /> cars park, because she does not want to see a row of construction/service vehicles lined up in front of her <br /> beautiful trees. There is a lot of land for people to park who are doing the work, and she wants to make <br /> sure it is done in the right way. She stated the septic person was out and mentioned to her husband that <br /> septic placement is going to be quite difficult based on the water. She may be saying it wrong, but there is <br /> water about 12 feet down in a lot of areas so it is a fairly wet space, and she wants to make sure those <br /> things are being looked at as the lot divisions and placement decisions are made. She wanted the safety of <br /> the Watershed District,the beauty/pristinity of the area, and the deer taken into consideration. <br /> Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 8:41 p.m. <br /> Ressler said the public comments made good points. This is a preliminary plat,but it is still subject to <br /> conditions that are afforded and required by the City, including Engineering and Planning comments. <br /> That has to do with screening and replacing in-kind trees that get removed. As much as everyone likes to <br /> see things remain rural, improvements for a buildable lot or what could be a buildable lot have to be given <br /> the ability to be made. <br /> Barnhart stated public comment raised good points. Before the project can be final, septic reports are <br /> required for each of the lots,which is the research the septic designer did to identify the prospective sites. <br /> The City has not gotten that report. It is a lot of technical writing that does not interest most people but is <br /> something the City looks at. Staff expects the report soon,before the City Council reviews it. If the <br /> Planning Commission would like to see it,the action could be tabled until then.As far as stormwater <br /> management and how it relates to the creek and new road,the City Engineers are reviewing that. The City <br /> does not normally give final approval as part of a permanent plan at this stage, but Staff has not really <br /> gotten anything from the Watershed District. He again noted the Commission could table the action if <br /> they wanted to see the Watershed District's response. Staff is moving things along because they anticipate <br /> what they are going to say,but the Planning Commission has the ability to see the response. The City is <br /> not necessarily proposing screening for this property, as it is adjacent to other parcels, because the land <br /> use types are the same: rural residential to rural residential. The City does not usually require screening in <br /> those situations. There are some trees along the new road that are to be planted, and usually there is some <br /> sort of entrance feature expected. They have not seen anything yet,and if the Commission wants to see <br /> Page 19 of 29 <br />