My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-11-2002 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2002
>
03-11-2002 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2023 9:24:12 AM
Creation date
2/9/2023 9:22:34 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
156
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
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25,2002 <br />13. #02-2755 Long Lake Fire Station—City of Orono, 340 fViiioiv Drive North— <br />Ctass III Subdivision, Variance and Conditional Use Permit—Continued <br />factors, the road right-of-way has been widened to 60’. There are wetlands on the <br />property. Part of the area will be filled for the fire station. They will be meeting with the <br />watershed district to approve the stormwater plans. The fire station itself comprises about <br />50% hardcover for the fire station. They would create a holding pond on lot 2 to mitigate <br />for the wetland that is being filled on lot 1. <br />The Planning Commission approved the preliminary plat as presented, subject to MCWD <br />approval of the wetland mitigation and stormwater management plan. <br />GafTron stated that widening the road to 60’ has resulted in the need for a 10 ’ setback <br />variance to locate the fire station building 40* from the proposed road outlot, rather than <br />the 50* required. The Planning Commission approved the setback variance, finding that <br />the variance is supported by the hardships, and will have no impact on the neighborhood <br />or adjacent properties, with the condition that if the 6“* bay is not built, the station must <br />meet the required 50 ’ setback. <br />The fire station building incorporated a hose tower that would be used for training <br />purposes. The tower exceeds the 30’ allowed height by almost 5 ’. The Planning <br />Commission denied the CUP for tower height because it would have a potential negative <br />visual impact on the neighborhood, its use could become a nuisance in the residential <br />neighborhood, the need for the excess height had not been demonstrated, and the potential <br />impacts of the tower in the residential neighborhood could not be satisfactorily mitigated. <br />Gaffron presented other issues for discussion. Staff recommended that park fees be <br />waived for Lot 1 and deferred for Lot 2 until it is residentially developed. Council would <br />have to decide whether Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fees would be due for the plat. <br />He suggested Council document allowable fire station uses. Staff recommended that <br />Council consider platting Lot 2 as an outlot since it was uncertain how the lot would <br />ultimately be used. He stated it would be most appropriate to dedicate the road corridor as <br />a public road, and then name it. No application fees had been paid. Staff recommended <br />that as a minimum, all out-of-pocket and consultant costs be charged. <br />Moorse stated that he had received an email from the fire chief requesting that they <br />approve the tower. Flint, Sansevere, and Mayor Peterson all stated that they were not <br />convinced the extra 5 ’ of height was necessary. Sansevere stated he was comfortable with <br />all of the staff s recommendations. Moorse stated they could approve the tower up to 30’ <br />in height. <br />Mayor Peterson asked about the ambulance portion of the fire station being the last add- <br />altemate. Jabbour stated that the committee agreed they would build the ambulance <br />portion, and that portion would not be subject to the cost-cap, and would definitely be <br />8
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.