Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Tuesday, February 16, 2021 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />that road, they may be able to use storm water on that City lot, as well. He said that is one more reason tc <br />have access on Willow. <br />Libby said in looking at the available area at the Willow Drive access, if that is properly radiused with an <br />apron in either direction, he thinks there is more than adequate safety. He just drove by today and did not <br />have any visibility problems during the day. He asked the developer if he has any plans for a Home <br />Owners' Association (HOA) within this development. <br />Mr. Stoddard replied yes, this would be HOA controlled, so storage and lawn care will be regulated by <br />the HOA. <br />Libby's main reason for asking is to find out how snow removal would be handled, not only on the <br />thoroughfare to access the radiuses to turn into the garages, but if this other proposal for an access road. <br />How would that be maintained with snow removal? <br />Mr. Stoddard said they will have to prove that they can store the snow there or will have to prove them <br />have a storm management plan to remove the snow in the events of large snowfall. He said they have <br />been successful at doing that in their projects. The feedback received to extend across Willow Drive is <br />wonderful, which gets them down to one cul-de-sac that meets those conditions. <br />Libby thinks the access to Willow Drive would be the most practical from a management standpoint, <br />whether it is an association with owners paying for snow plowing as part of their HOA dues. It sounds <br />like Mr. Stoddard has plenty of track record at managing snow removal. He would be in favor of the <br />Willow Drive access. <br />Ressler said regarding storm water it sounds like it could be managed on site, especially if it is proposed <br />to access on Willow. He moved on to use and said the Planning Commission has already covered it and <br />thinks it is reasonable for the twin homes, especially as they have talked about finding ways to increase <br />some density in different parts of the City. He is completely in support of that. He asked if anyone is <br />opposed. <br />No Commissioners were opposed. <br />Ressler moved on to design standards and noted they are on a preliminary sketch so they have not gotten <br />into a whole lot of detail. He does not think anyone is offended by how the design would be. <br />Libby asked the developer if he has considered a development of detached townhomes rather than the <br />twin home design and is it because of the economics of building two houses at one time. <br />Mr. Stoddard noted their first go was detached HOA town homes and they could not get the density to <br />make it work. He said it is very preliminary on the twin homes designs. He added regarding storm water <br />that the Planning Commission would like to keep it on site, noting they have not done all the calculations <br />and knowing how much that is going to be. He would like to ask the Planning Commission and Barnhart <br />to keep an open mind as he has had discussions with the water shed district and they are absolutely fine if <br />they brought it off site, for example, to the fire station. It is the ownership of that who would have to <br />permit and it is all about the quantity of the storm event. He asked the Planning Commission to keep that <br />crack open in case 1/3 of this needs to be for storm water if that is what the calculations show. <br />Page 36 of 38 <br />