Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 17,2015 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Landgraver stated the Planning Commission should go through the list given the number of people that <br /> have turned out for this application. <br /> Leskinen stated the Planning Commission is not discounting the access, but until the City finds out if <br /> there is a Plan B, it will all be conjecture. Leskinen stated the Planning Commission will address some of <br /> the other issues in relation to this proposal. <br /> Leskinen noted Mark Gronberg has addressed each of the City Engineer's comments and that it is not <br /> necessary for the Planning Commission to go through those again. Leskinen asked whether the developer <br /> intends to do any grading of individual driveways or building pads as part of the initial development <br /> improvements. <br /> Stedman stated the driveways will be done by the individual owners as well as the building pads. <br /> Leskinen asked whether the Planning Commission has any concerns over wetland buffers as it relates to <br /> Item No. 2. <br /> Gaffron stated there needs to be confirmation from the Watershed District on what the buffers will be <br /> befare proceeding forward since there is a chance for potential changes to lot lines. Gaffron stated in his <br /> view it would be helpful to have that information before moving forward. <br /> Leskinen stated Item No. 3 relates to the proposed public cul-de-sac road length if Heritage Lane is <br /> extended. Leskinen asked whether the Planning Commission has any concerns with the 1,600 foot road <br /> length. <br /> Thiesse stated the City should consider changing it to 1,600 feet since the City and Fire Department <br /> continually allows it. <br /> Leskinen stated for discussion of this particular development, it appears the Planning Commission has no <br /> concern with the length of the road. <br /> Leskinen stated Item No. 4 relates to cul-de-sac design and location and the impact on the adjoining <br /> properties. Leskinen stated the options wou(d be to keep the two cul-de-sacs or taking out the wings on <br /> one. <br /> Thiesse stated he is a proponent for not having a cul-de-sac in the middle of the street since the cul-de-sac <br /> would encourage people to do a U-turn in the middle of the road. Thiesse stated the school bus would <br /> need to go a block further and then utilize the new cul-de-sac. <br /> Gaffron stated when it comes to the retaining wall situation,the developer is talking about filling a <br /> wetland and having a corridor. The developer is attempting to hold the retaining walls within that 50-fot <br /> corridor but that the City does not know how tall those walls will be and what the visual impact to the <br /> neighbors on either side will be. <br /> Gronberg stated to his knowledge they would be in the four to five foot range. <br /> Thiesse pointed out the profile appears to have them at eight to nine feet. <br /> Gronberg stated there could be some areas where they will be seven or eight feet tall. <br /> Page 38 of 43 <br />