Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Tuesday,January 19,2021 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Attorney Aaron Dean, 5900 Mount Normandale Drive,Bloomington, is representing Barbara Burwell, <br /> and submitted a 12-page letter earlier in the afternoon along with several exhibits. He recognizes the <br /> importance of the work that the Planning Commission does and sometimes with a municipal Planning <br /> Commission the idea is to kick the can down the road, issue an approval with certain conditions and hope <br /> that the City Council operates as the final say. He asks that this Planning Commission resist that;there <br /> are a number of problems with this particular proposal and he wants to outline about 6 of them because <br /> once they understand the problems with the proposal, he thinks the proposal has to be rejected. Mr. Dean <br /> asked for the earlier exhibit with the red and blue overlay and pointed out how the road enters the new <br /> development and they will see the access is off Shoreline Drive. When Mr. Dean spoke with Barnhart <br /> last week,he was told the County was now requiring,not recommending,a right-hand turn lane for west <br /> bound traffic. This is important because all of the questions asked so far to the Applicant are"Do you <br /> care?"Mr. Dean said of course they don't care. The Applicant could care less about a right-hand turn <br /> lane because it is not their property that will be impacted, it is Barbara Burwell's property that will be <br /> impacted and nothing shows it better than what is onscreen. Ms.Burwell owns two Millston Road <br /> properties and the only way to put in a right-hand turn lane is to take a portion of her property—why <br /> would the Applicant care? They could care less if Barbara Burwell is impacted and that is why they don't <br /> care. Ms.Burwell cares and she doesn't want any portion of her land taken for a right-hand turn lane that <br /> the County now requires,not recommends. What Mr.Dean saw earlier today via email was a statement <br /> from the County's representatives that actually the right-of-way is sufficient and no portion of her <br /> property will be required to be taken. He asked where are the engineer drawings,where are the plans that <br /> actually show this? Until they have those plans approved by the County,this Planning Commission <br /> cannot approve this plan. All that will happen is that they will invite a lawsuit because his client's <br /> property will be taken to accommodate other private property with a right-hand turn lane. This is the first <br /> and biggest problem. The second problem is that the road or private drive that exists is being moved over <br /> to the east to the inch,as far as possible to the Burwell property line and will take down all of the trees. <br /> Some of the trees that will be impacted are on Burwell property and they cannot do it. The Applicant has <br /> had months to develop a landscaping plan that would show what trees will be taken down and what will <br /> not. Now they are in the middle of winter with snow cover and they cannot actually see which trees will <br /> be taken down and the roots that will be impacted...he said isn't it convenient to be having the meeting <br /> now. When Mr.Dean spoke with Barnhart last week,he asked specifically and said he needs to see the <br /> measurements for this private road and the cul-de-sac, and Barnhart said it is right at 1,000 feet. Mr. <br /> Dean asked 1,000 feet"from where to where?" Barnhart told Mr. Dean if they measure from the road up <br /> to where the private road starts to turn,basically if they go straight up and where it starts to turn,they take <br /> that measurement and then where it goes off about 45 degrees and measure to across the cul-de-sac. <br /> Those two measurements are 1,000 feet;they are not measuring the actual distance of travel as it takes <br /> farther to go around the circumference of the circle than the diameter of a circle and Mr. Dean said they <br /> are over 1,000 feet. He asked to show the black and white drawing and show the proposed house pad on <br /> lot 3 of Tanager Estates. Once they have this down,this proposed subdivision falls apart. The placement <br /> of the proposed house pad of lot 3 of Tanager Estates can never be built there,never. That is the anchor <br /> point for the ALS line that is going from lot 3 of Tanager Estates and going all the way in a southeasterly <br /> direction to the Burwell house. They can look at this particular plat and see why it does not work; first, <br /> he pointed out the sectioned-off area where it says"bluff'throughout lot 5 and said that bluff goes into <br /> lot 3 and noted how close that bluff line is to the proposed house plan. If they now go down and look just <br /> underneath the bluff to where the house pad is on lot 5,it says 30-foot bluff setback,he said now compare <br /> it to the area of lot 3 of Tanager Estates...it is not 30 feet. He asked to pass around a sheet with <br /> highlighted areas. <br /> Barnhart said if there are other exhibits,they can scan those and put them onscreen. <br /> Page 6 of 28 <br />