04-15-1996 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 18, 1996 (#6 - #2114 Clark Winslow - Continued) Gustaiwn confirmed that there would be no problem with the 929.4 devation. Peterson noted that this was his first recommendation for approval of pond dredgii^ in a designated wetland. (#7) #2115 FRANK BENNETT, 31S/40S TONKAWA ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBUC HEARING - 8:40-8:58 P.M. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. The Appficant was represented by Dale Gustafkm. Mabusth reported that the pond will be located in a low area of the 7 plus acre lot and is made up of types 1 and 3 wetlands. The wetland is not DNR protect^ nor on the National Wetlands Inventory Map, and would not require either Corps of Engineers or MCWD approval. The <mly approval necessary is that firom the City of Orono. The proposed pond is at 4; 1 slope with a overflow drainage through the ravine arxl to the southeast and eventually flows under Tonkawa Road. The ravine on the Gage property suffers major erosion. Mabusth noted that the pond would serve as a stormwater retention area. The proposal is for removal of 1900 cubic yards of fill. Gustafkm suggested asking why the dredging would not be a permit issue of the Corps of Engineer. He noted the Corps of Engineers have guidelines for permits in areas of under 1/2 acre that qualify for nationwide permit. He noted applicant may still need permission. The Commission was informed that the survey work was completed by Mark Gronberg. Peterson asked if the intention of the dredging was for a wildlife pond. Gustafson said this was not the intention. The imention was to gain an aesthetically pleasing look with open water. The erosion of the ravine on the Gage property was noted. Gusta&on said the location of the pond has spinoff benefits and would allow for diversification of habitat. Gustafson said the pond would aid in creating a water retention area for ninoff, protect and slow down the runoff^ and the drainage running into the ditch would be metered. It was further noted that the proposal calls for the removal of the existing access off of Tonkawa, and the fill would be used for the shoulder of the new drive. The driveway would then link with the drive further south on Tonkawa. Hawn commented that the application was not proposed as wildlife pond for permit reasons, but if the applicant would want wildlife, a greater slope would be required. Gusta^n said the depth must be obtained as the pond would become shallower over time, and it was important to maintain the water retention. The possibility of a larger, shallower pond was discussed, but it was noted that it would disturb a larger area which was not desired. L,—...