My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-16-2021 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2021
>
02-16-2021 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2021 9:07:35 AM
Creation date
3/16/2021 9:06:54 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Tuesday, February 16, 2021 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />open to the number of waivers identified through the RPUD analysis included in his Staff memo or would <br />they prefer to pursue creation of its own zoning district. He believes Kirchner suggested the RPUD is <br />probably the way to go rather than creating its own zoning district. <br />Kirchner clarified that was his feedback — he believes the RPUD is better than the Planning Commission <br />trying to carve out their own zoning district for one specific parcel in the City. <br />Bollis agrees with RPUD, as well. He said Barnhart is comfortable with this even though it is not allowed <br />to be an RPUD because of acreage, is there a mechanism where the Planning Commission can make it an <br />RPUD. <br />Barnhart replied yes. <br />Ressler asked if there is any opposition to the RPUD. He is hearing none. He asked to talk about access. <br />Barnhart has heard pretty consistently that they are open to an access directly off Willow Drive. <br />Ressler does not have a problem with that and asked the Planning Commission if anyone has a problem. <br />Erickson does. He has walked that from his office to chamber meetings at the fire station and when you <br />are that close to the bridge, there are sightline issues. He can understand why that was problematic <br />previously and thinks it is much safer to do the way it is shown. Similarly, to backtrack on density, he <br />does not have any problem with it as shown here; however, he does have some concerns about all three of <br />the cul-de-sacs that are substandard. He would be more comfortable if at least the middle one was closer <br />to a standard size. He does not know how it will work out with storm water, either. Adding a cul-de-sac <br />and digging for storm water may result in losing a unit. <br />McCutcheon said as far as setbacks, his guidance would be to reduce hardcover as much as possible. He <br />does not know if there is an opportunity to move the street closer than they normally would to a property <br />line, especially since there is a fire parking lot right there. Anything they can do to achieve space and <br />save hardcover. As it is drawn on screen besides the cul-de-sac, he asked what the setback is from where <br />the road is. He clarified his question is how far is the road from the property line. <br />Barnhart said it is about 10 feet. He has heard pretty consistent feedback with the exception of Erickson <br />on the access location. He noted these five questions guide further refinement of the plan. If the Planning <br />Commission can agree that access off Willow is preferred, great. He has heard from most of them that <br />storm water should be managed on site. <br />Ressler noted there is one Commissioner opposed to access via Willow and asked if anyone else feels that <br />way. <br />None of the other Commissioners felt that way. <br />Ressler said regarding the storm water situation, he does not feel qualified to answer that. <br />Bollis' opinion on storm water would be if they are accessing through the site on Willow Drive, it should <br />all be within the site. If they demand that they access through a City lot and there is a lot of hardcover on <br />Page 35 of 38 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.