Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Tuesday, February 16, 2021 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />Ressler noted this early on, he does not see anyone opposed to the design standards. He asked for <br />feedback again regarding Willow Drive as the access point. <br />McCutcheon had to make a compromise because he wants to reduce the hardcover and having huge cul- <br />de-sacs everywhere; as long the City Engineers or whoever approves it says it is safe to turn on Willow, <br />he is fine with it. Whatever the utility garden space will be 10 years from now, not having a road there is <br />nice as it opens up options. <br />Ressler has not walked the property but wonders if there is the possibility of future access to Holbrook <br />Park there. <br />McCutcheon wonders if the Parks Board should chime in on access to that lot as that is great feedback. <br />Mr. Stoddard said the interesting thing is the little bit of property above the subject site and above the <br />park is owned by MnDOT. He has a request in to purchase that and they like the request but it will take <br />about 18 months to get back with a decision. It was extra, leftover land and the thoughts were to connect <br />the site to the park through there. He noted they could always do one on the south, as well, and will <br />propose it in one or the other of the areas. <br />Libby asked if they would create a rain garden or what the methodology with the storm water will be. <br />Mr. Stoddard said the storm water will take a significant area and that is why he is asking for openness to <br />see if they can get access to do more on the south. They had three storm water/rain gardens on the site <br />plan already and would like some kind of central feature and having a water feature around that. He <br />noted in Village Lane there is a road with a T and all driveways and sidewalks are paver bricks, and there <br />is a 50 -foot roundabout in the middle that is authentic cobblestones. They were thinking about some kind <br />of feature similar on this project, as well. He thanked the Planning Commission for their feedback. <br />Ressler thinks Mr. Stoddard's request for the Planning Commission to keep an open -mind on the storm <br />water has been heard and he does not think anyone has a strong opinion one way or the other. <br />Bollis said if they are talking about using a City lot for a portion of the storm water, they should be <br />thoughtful of the future development of the City lot for City purposes and what sort of storm water <br />management they would need for that lot. That is why he would be hopeful that it could all stay on site, <br />either by reducing hardcover or density. <br />Barnhart noted they are just looking for very high-level comments. Every time there is a sketch plan, the <br />Planning Commission provides their wishes and goals. The Applicant chooses whether to apply those to <br />a new plan or not. Barnhart's final question is does the Planning Commission prefer to see the resulting <br />sketch plan based on the comments given regarding access, storm water, use, before moving it forward. <br />Ressler said the majority is open-minded to looking at what it would be as proposed from Willow Drive <br />and they probably do not want to move forward yet as it is pretty preliminary, but to see a proposed plan <br />that shows access from Willow, and a storm water plan. <br />Barnhart said the Planning Commission can comment on it and move it forward and the City Council will <br />see the sketch plan based on their feedback. Or they can suggest the Applicant apply the Planning <br />Commission's comments as another review for the sketch plan. <br />Page 37 of 38 <br />