Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, October 21,2002 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#11) 7:30 P.M. #02-2839 BOYER BUILDING CORPORATION, 3320 WATERTOWN <br /> ROAD, Continued <br /> zone and will be divided by creating two building sites (Lots 1 and 2) and shared driveway <br /> (Outlot A). Weinberger noted that the general site plan meets all requirements for a front/back lot <br /> subdivision, a 3 acre site for Lot 2 is met. Since back lots are also required to have driveway <br /> access a minimum of 30' in width, Outlot A has been designed much wider than the 30' to allow <br /> the driveway approach to be located at the highest point to provide the best site lines for the <br /> driveway. There is no request for the development for a third property at this time. <br /> Weinberger pointed out that each lot has demonstrated two septic sites which meets local and <br /> state standards. There are wetlands on Lot 1 and Lot 2, which are protected by the City and will <br /> be subject to some minimal impact by this development, however 50% of the site is designated <br /> wetland. Due to Fire Code requirements for a minimum 20' driveway access, including the <br /> portion across the wetland, a variance will need to be granted to allow access to go thru the <br /> wetlands, and WCA guidelines might require additional wetlands be created on the property. <br /> With regard to the stormwater trunk fee, Weinberger indicated that staff believed the City <br /> Council, and not the Planning Commission, would be reviewing the fee structure and impact this <br /> development has on the overall stormwater management process, and make its recommendation. <br /> Weinberger stated that staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat and a wetland <br /> alteration variance for the shared driveway based on four findings on page three of the staff <br /> memo, followed by five conditions on page four of the staff memo dated October 11, 2002. <br /> Boyer stated that widening the driveway should be possible, as should achieving a 10% grade in <br /> the steepness of the driveway. <br /> There were no public comments. <br /> Chair Smith stated that this was a beautiful piece of property. <br /> Hawn stated that the subdivision seemed pretty clear cut, and other than determining the <br /> stormwater trunk fee,this was a standard subdivision. With regard to the fee, which was created <br /> to promote the kind of stormwater process that will be occurring naturally on these two <br /> properties, Hawn felt the fee to be too steep in this particular case. She viewed it as almost a <br /> form of double taxation, since the wetland was undevelopeable and performing the exact <br /> function that the trunk fee was set up to promote. <br /> Mabusth pointed out that due to the requirement for a wider driveway, they would be <br /> encroaching slightly into the wetland. <br /> Fritzler encouraged the applicant to design the long driveway in a way that would deter a great <br /> deal of runoff from ending up on Watertown Road. <br /> Page 10 <br />