11/17/03 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,November 17, 2003 6:00 o'clock p.m. (#11) #03-2961 NINA WILDMAN, 745 SPRING HILL ROAD, PRELIMINARY PLAT, Continued In conclusion, Gaffron stated that with regard to the health, safety and welfare obligations of the City must to some extent be balanced against the negative impacts of creating an appropriate access situation. The unusual length of the private road and the individual driveways extending from it, create a unique rural character that is becoming rare in Orono, but also creates practical problems for the provision of fire protection services. City Code standards require a 24'paved private road within a 50'private road outlot to serve a development of this magnitude. We have required such road standards for private roads serving as few as three homes; this road will serve 5 or more homes. Given the recommendations of the City Engineer and Fire Marshal, staff must recommend that the road be upgraded from Spring Hill Road to the loop cul-de-sac, to a 24'paved width if this subdivision goes forward. If Planning Commission finds that there is some basis for reduction of the paved width, it should not be reduced below 20' in order to comply with the Fire Code standards. Any recommendation for approval should address the list of`issues for discussion' and make a recommendation on each topic. The subdivision is subject to the standard fees, easement dedications, etc. as noted in the text. Gronberg stated that the applicant was merely adding one new home at this time and would discourage the construction of a full fledged road which would, in essence, change the quaint character of the area. Evan Rice, of Faegre and Benson Law Firm, representing the Hawn's, 625 Spring Hill Road, who share access points with the applicant, pointed out that the applicants do not have an access easement running across the Winston property wider than 20'. He indicated that his clients object to the expansion or further burden of those access points from Spring Hill Road which would require the applicant to obtain an additional 10' from wither property owner. He stated that, since no such agreement exists to date, and until access issues are resolved, more time devoted by staff and the Commission would not be recommended, since these approvals would be premised on certain agreements taking place. Eleanor Winston, 755 Spring Hill Road, stated that, while she was not present to block the subdivision, she wanted to preserve the unique character of the area. She urged the Commission to require more than the minimum amount of pavement,which would negatively impact the wetlands. She asked why the loop access area was necessary, since the residents could construct their own driveway loops. PAGE 25 of 41