11-20-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTF.S OF THK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MFtTING IILLDON NOVI MBLR 20. 1995 (#11- #2086 Robert and Janice Callan - Continued) Lindquist questioned if the Planning Commission could ask for mitigation Callan said the area was low wetland He was asking for approval to gain open water for aesthetic reasons as well as enhancing a water fowl area Callan saw the size and sco|>e as having no significant impact on the existing bird or wildlife He saw three areas of Crystal Bay Farms participate in wetland ownership This particular parcel is 1/2 of the area He noted the other 2 have been built on and are located r>n a higher elevation He did not believe anv of these homeowners would ask for any change from the original wetland designation as they are high in elevation and have no view of the area. Callan asked for approval without mitigation There were no public comments Smith said she w as of the opinion that others would make similar requests. Lindquist said he preferred to keep the area as it now is but questioned whether the application could be denied Peterson said he does not like to make changes to wetland areas He did not see the proposal as bad but felt watertbwl would not stay on a small pond area. George Stickney, the current owner, the lot is 380' in width and is a maple forest, he said with the draintile and transitional growth, the area could be opened to maintain the cuirrent wetland area Gronberg commented that agencies are encouraging type I and 2 wetlands. He saw no reason not to build more type 3 wetlands He saw benefits to maintain sediment storage. Lindquist moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2086 for 1:1 mitigation equal to the open water area, w ith condition #3, with the use of the scoop method. Callan asked if the Planning Commission would consider type 1 mitigation. Lindquist said the mitigation must be type 2 Callan asked for a 8 1 grade on the back side but said would create a substandard grade to the front He said he would consider a 4:1 on the front half o fthe open water for visibility. Peterson said the City Engineer said a 4; I slope was too steep adding that the City Engineer and DNR would make the decision on the slope. Peterson said if the City Engineer was in favor of varying amounts of slope, it could be done. Vote; Ayes 2, Hawn, Lindquist, Nays 3, Smith, Berg, Peterson Motion fails. 24