06-17-1996 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 20, 1996 (#1 - #2136 Greenfield Corporation - Continued) Jim Pfennig ot Greentleld Corporation asked to respond. He noted that the property to the east, which is proposed to have road access from Outlot B, has an outlot access located more to the east Regarding the septic site discussion. Pfennig said the subdivision would have an architectural review committee and covenants. He thought the first owners would have knowledge of the septic sites but did not know if that would continue with subsequent owners Pfennig remarked concerning lot I and the 200' frontage on the County roads He noted if Outlot A was extended to the west, there could be more frontage, but he did not believe it would make sense to blacktop in order to gain the 200' width He also noted that the type I and 2 wetlands go up to 16’ in elevation, which is unusual Gronberg added that alot of the area will not be landscaped He envisioned lawn for the areas adjacent to building sites and road but then leav ing the remainder natural Pfennig said the initial plans were to plant in alfalfa. Gronberg commented that there is a loss of 70' with Outlot B and the 50* road setback rather than a 30’ side setback at east lot line Outlot B will not benefit this development. Gronberg said he saw the development as similar to a PUD with clustering to the north, but saw no problem with the septic sites being close together as it does not interfere with the wells Peterson asked about easements Mabusth said the City will asking for a bike easement along North Shore Drive and Bayside Road The County has recently shown a comprehensive bike trail plan along North Shore Drive on the east side The Park Commission asked for a bike trail within the drainaue and utilitv easement Mabusth said W ^ there is an issue with lots 5 and 6 regarding additional right-of-way There will be a 10' easement Mabusth said Weekman informed her the bike trail easement of 10’ will not impact lots 5 and 6 The County’s comprehensive plan calls for 46 ’ of additional right-of- way and trail easement The City will ask for only 10’ of bike trail easement and no additional right-of-way adjacent to lots 5 and 6. There were no public comments Lindquist asked w hat different would occur regarding width if outlot B was eliminated. Gronberg said lot 3 and 4 ’s lot widths would be expanded Lot lines would be moved with lot 4 to the east and lot 3 would be alittle laraer. 3