Laserfiche WebLink
NIINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIl�TG <br /> Monday,May 18,2015 <br /> 6:30 o'clocl�p.m. <br /> The deve2oper has submitted a Conservation Design report. The City Engineer has indicated that tf�e <br /> report is lacking specific elements and should be amended to include those elements. The applicant has <br /> submitted a response to that r�port today but Staff has not had an opportunity to review it thoroughiy. <br /> The must critical elemiemt is the importance of establishing,for the portion of the property that is being <br /> developed,what elements are being preserved,how they are being preserved,why they are being <br /> preserved, and what the basis is for those decisions to greserve certain elements and not others. <br /> The Planning Commission shauld discuss the following: <br /> 1, Has the applicar►t demonstrated via the sttbmitted Conservation Design report and tt►mugh other <br /> mathods that there is justifica.tion for the proposed impacts to the Big Woods portion of the <br /> P�P�� <br /> 2. Are the proposed design and proservation moasures as proposed in the draft covenaat documents <br /> adequate to protiect the site environmenta!elements of importance? <br /> 3. Ar�there any other cancems that need#o be addt�essed? <br /> Staff recommends the a�plicant be advised to address tha items detai2ed in the City Engineer's commonts. <br /> In addition,preliminary plat should not move forward until or unless docvmentation is provided <br /> conf`trming that tho MCWD has approved the wetIand delineation boundaries. Staff fttrther recommends <br /> that specifc driveway corridors for all nine of the easterly lots be shown on the preliminary plat drawing, <br /> as each site has firees,wetlands,or topography that may impact or could be impacted by driveway <br /> locabions. <br /> The Planning Commission should hold tho pubIic hearing and roceive comments frorn the public. <br /> Following discussion of this application,tk�e Planning Commission should provide tho spplicant and Staff <br /> with direction as to wh�her or how the proposed plat should be revised. <br /> Lemkc asked if the con�ect application number far this application is 15-3720. <br /> Gaffron indicated k�e sent an e-mail to the Plscuiing Commissioners today noting the correct number of the <br /> application is I 5-3739. St�'s report has been changed to c�flect that change. Gaffron stated there were <br /> also a couple of ather specific changes to the memo relatmg to the owner of the property not being part of <br /> the develapment process but is merely selting the prnperty. Gaffi-on stated outside of that,thcre was not a <br /> great deaI of chango to Staffs memo and that a copy of Staff's revisod report has been included in the <br /> public packet located outside of the Council chambers. Gai�ron no#ed a significant amount of information <br /> regarding this application has been submitted in the last 24 hours. <br /> Landgraver asked if there is a precedent for developing or not developing land known as Big Woais from <br /> a historicsl perspective. Landgraver noted there are a mumber of very imaportant environmental <br /> components with tfiis development and that Staff hes noted the City does not have a lot of tools for <br /> preventing tr�removal. <br /> Ga�on stated at the time of the development of the Spring Hi1l Golf Course,eve�ything north of the <br /> County Road 6 portion af the property was Big Woocis. There were no specific requirements at that time <br /> t1�at protected the Big Woods. C3affron stated after a lot of discussion and a year-long assessment of the <br /> Page 10 af 37 <br />