10-18-1993 Planning PacketC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MESTJTES OF THE ORONO PI.ANMNG COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 18. 1993 (#10) #1877 TANDEM PROPERTBES/PETER ANDREA COMPANY - CONT Deanovic responded that a large group had visited the site including representatives of the Watershed District. City staff. .Army Corps of Engineers. BWSR and Steve Schirmers for septic sites. In the end. City ordinances will be a determining factor. Deanovic thought 1; 1 mitigation may be possible. The Watershed representative felt this was an opportunity for improvements. One of the main issues is that what was classified as wetlands in the past differs from current definitions. Most of the wetlands were classified as Type 1. Gaffron confirmed that under MPCA standards there are cenain types of wetlands that meet the criteria for septic installation. Putnam felt their biggest problem will be dealing with the Orono ordinances relative to the setbacks for septic systems and the dry buildable land. Putnam gave e.xamples of how the wetland maps differ. According to the City map. there was 2.66 acres of wetlands on the Coffin property but 12.15 acres have been identified by their consultant using current methods. Deanovic explained that City maps were done in 1974 and wetlands were identified under different standards on a black and white aerial photo. Although the Dickey property showed no wetlands on City maps, surveyors designated approximately 4 acres. Putnam explained that on the Coffin property of 62 acres, if the City maps were used lot sizes would be 2.47 acres. If the wetlands were subtracted, lot sizes would be reduced to 2.08 acres. The City will have to decide how to deal with the wetland designations. Deanovic commented that they had discussed with other agencies how they felt about changing some of the wetlands. They were agreeable since better wetlands would be built rather than a "rut in a field". Putnam stated that according to Orono's code, it they created a NURP pond or wetland, that would have to be subtracted off of the tw'o acres. At this time it is a 1:1 replacement but after January' 1 it will be 2:1. The way it stands now. if four acres of wetland were altered at this site, four acres of wetland would have to be replaced somewhere else. This could be done on site, within the Watershed District or within the County. If. for example, a wetland were replaced in Medina, what benefit does that have for Orono even though it meets the State requirements? Ihitnain noted that staff had suggested to Putnam he not look at planned development since this property is not in a sewered area. Meeting a 2-acre requirement may create a problem on some of the lots with the wetlands considered and meeting the 75 setback from the wetlands for septic systems. 23