My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-22-1991 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1991
>
01-22-1991 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/14/2022 12:22:47 PM
Creation date
12/14/2022 12:02:37 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
255
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
Zoning File #1604 <br />January 16» 1991 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />Discussion ~ <br />The City Engineer has reviewed the application from a storm <br />water management standpoint and has recommended approval <br />conditioned on adequate silt fencing and compliance with <br />Watershed District requirements. <br />The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has preliminarily <br />]^Qviewed and tabled the application until preliminary approve <br />from Orono (Planning Commission approval) is granted. The <br />applicant's engineer has made the plan revisions requested by the <br />Watershed District and has provided the engineering <br />hydraulics data necessary to show no adverse storm water/flood <br />plain management impact. <br />Regaining Issues ~ <br />As noted in the memo of November 15th/ absent any z^oning <br />code directive that such pond construction is strictly prohibited <br />under any circumstances/ if all hydrologic/engineering concerns <br />are satisfied/ then the only other question in the granting of <br />this conditional use permit is rather subjective; will <br />construction of this pond and proposed grading work at its <br />perimeter be compatible with the policies expressed in Section <br />10.55/ Subdivision 1/ i.e, will such work have no adverse effect <br />on the natural environment qualities of this wetland aret? <br />While there has been some neighborhood opposition to the <br />â– proposed changes to the wetland/ the applicant has reiterated his <br />goals are to create a better wildlife habitat while cleaning up <br />the debris and trash duiiiped on the property over many years. <br />Finally/ please again review Page 4 of the November 15th <br />memo regarding the issue of the brick pillars constructed around <br />the perimeter of the property. Please direct staff and applicant <br />as to whether the pillars in question are allowed "as-is as a <br />fence/ or whether they should be subject to a building permit or <br />variance application. <br />ty <br />staff Reconmendation - <br />If the Planning Commission agrees that the proposed work <br />will have no adverse impact on the natural environment qualities <br />of this wetland area, a recommendation for project approval could <br />be appropriate on the basis that all storm water and flood plain <br />management engineering requirements have been met so that there <br />is no adverse impact on the quantity or quality of run-oft <br />leaving the site. Approval would be conditioned on meeting all <br />construction and site protection requirements reco^ended by the <br />City Engineer and required by the Watershed District/ including <br />properly constructed silt fencing and timely revegetation of <br />disturbed areas.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.