My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/20/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
06/20/2005 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2012 9:31:00 AM
Creation date
3/9/2012 9:30:57 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,June 20,2005 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#05-3113 Natural Environments Corp.,Continued) <br /> Walsh noted the root structure from the buckthorn is already growing back and that he is unsure why it is <br /> being considered clear-cutting. <br /> Walsh stated he would like to deal with the stairway at another time. Walsh noted they have removed all <br /> of the hardcover that was required as part of their hardcover variance approval. <br /> Sanders stated they came to the decision to leave the existing stairway to help maintain the integrity of the <br /> slope and that the plan they are proposing calls for more vegetation than what was originally there. <br /> Sanders pointed out the root structure for the buckthorn is still in place. <br /> Rahn stated it appears that the plans before the Planning Commission show construction of a stairway <br /> rather than restoring the lakeshore. <br /> Sanders stated based on the city engineer's recommendations they decided not to proceed with rebuilding <br /> the stairway. Sanders stated they are only proposing at this time to restore the vegetation. <br /> Gundlach stated she did speak with the city engineer about removal of the staircase and whether it should <br /> remain, and the city engineer indicated that his comments remain the same. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the city engineer typically reviews a restoration plan. <br /> Gundlach stated he does. <br /> Rahn inquired whether the applicant has any document indicating that the city engineer has reviewed the <br /> restoration plan. <br /> Walsh stated the city engineer has indicated that he looks to Terry to come up with a plan to restore the <br /> shoreline, which is what they are proposing. <br /> Rahn stated it is his understanding that the plan is not detailed enough. <br /> Gundlach stated Staff's concern is the fact that the plan is labeled schematic and is not for construction <br /> purposes. Gundlach stated the city engineer did relay a concern about erosion into the lake during <br /> construction and that the proposed plan does not address that. <br /> Sanders indicated they are not constructing anything but merely restoring the vegetation. <br /> Walsh indicated they would prefer to deal with the construction of a new stairway at another time and that <br /> they would address the city engineer's comments at that time concerning construction and runoff. <br /> Jurgens stated the biggest concern is the word schematic and that it is a representation that is subject to <br /> change. Jurgens questioned whether this application should be tabled to allow the applicant time to <br /> prepare a detailed plan and have it reviewed by the city engineer. <br /> PAGE 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.