08-13-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, June 15, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 12 Libby clarified that he should have said municipality of Orono. He asked, referencing the other Commissioners’ recommendations, where the language came from. He noted the language was from someone who felt there might have been a level of expertise at the City and that perhaps now the language needs to be more general with authoritative expert opinions getting involved. Barnhart said that part of the code is in place currently. The only change is removing “ash” from the list. Libby asked if it was old code that has probably been around for a long time. Barnhart said that is probably the case. He stated he would find a resource for appropriate street trees and will work that into the next draft, because there may be trees that are appropriate in the Central Minnesota region that are not appropriate in a street/right-of-way environment. For example, you don’t want evergreens right next to the street to create vision issues. Libby stated the DNR’s credentialed arborists are quite astute at making those recommendations. Barnhart said he would find the reference and include it in the next draft. Bollis commented that they should refer to the soil conditions on the site; for instance, an oak thrives in sandy soil but is not going to work well in clay or black dirt. He has seen where they will put in 200 oaks on a hillside in Orono and they die within the first year. Libby noted a credentialed arborist would understand the soil combination. Ressler stated, as far as having specific trees, if somebody plants a honey locust and it develops a disease, then the City has to amend the text. If the City's code is simplified to have it redirected to someone that is an expert that is going to be keeping up with the different species that can be added or subtracted, that is something the Planning Commission can be mindful of. Libby noted it can cost $4,000 to take down a cottonwood tree that has lived out its life expectancy to 90 feet tall and is ready to come across the community’s power lines. Ressler said he is not in favor of tabling the matter. The feedback provided has been documented and hopefully useful for Barnhart and the City Attorney at their discretion for review at the Council. The Planning Commission can leave it up to the Council if they deem it necessary to come back to the Planning Commission. Bollis referenced Line 1746 requiring additional frontage specifically for outlots or lots. Barnhart stated lot frontage is measured for lake lots at the lakeshore and 75 feet back. That is how you get to the lot width. There is no minimum requirement for that access on the public street, creating some problems, notably at Casco Point. The language allows for 18 feet minimum. This is an eight-foot wide driveway and five feet on either side, the minimum setback for hardcover in most residential zoning districts. Bollis asked whether the current minimum is nine or eight feet.