05/17/2004 Planning Commission Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o'clock p.m. (14. #04-3016 HENRY LAZNIARZ,Continued) Mr. Lazniarz continued that each lot will be custom graded to minimize the loss of trees and he committed to planting trees along the driveway to make it a tree-lined road and to replace trees lost on house sites. He repeated their intention to minimize impacts to each site. Jim Dunn, speaking for Mary Dunn,remarked the agreement has not yet been reached as Mr.Lazniarz stated. It is under consideration and not yet signed. Chair Mabusth asked for further public comments. Mrs. Coleman asked for further confirmation that there the houses proposed will be 50' back from her property line. Mr. Lazniarz responded that the setback is 50' but the houses will not be positioned at the setback, resulting in potentially more distance,up to about 100' to the Coleman's property line because the houses will be closer to the proposed street. Chair Mabusth closed the public hearing. Chair Mabusth led the Planning Commission is discussion of the following Issues for Consideration: 1. Does the Planning Commission agree with the use of the PRD subdivision method for this property? It was a consensus that the PRD subdivision method should be used for this property. 2. Should the areas to be preserved via conservation easements,be in an Outlot,or merely as an easement within each individual property? Chair Mabusth commented that to be consistent with prior Planning Commission decisions, outlots owned by a homeowners association were created. Gaffron concurred and explained that in standard subdivision plats usually individual lots were created with a wetland easement. He advised that within an outlot the City can put whatever conditions/easements is deemed necessary. Bremer asked for information about why not have an outlot versus individual lot ownership; Gaffron responded that with a homeowner's association managing an outlot there is greater recreations use by more people than if it is individually owned and had potential trespass issues. Bremer commented that she would not support a path to the Luce Line Trail. Chair Mabusth concurred with Bremer and thought there may be problems with people trespassing from the Luce Line Trail into the subdivision area. She suggested the Parks Commission should look at the proposed plan prior to Planning Commission action to ascertain if they have an interest in a walking access to the creek and its existing bridge. Mr. Van Eeckhout interjected that in the winter skiers use the land but in the summer there are very few. Kempf suggested the Planning Commission focus on one issue at a time. He stated he liked the idea of a large outlot used as a shared amenity managed by a homeowners association. Kempf noted the matter of pedestrian access perhaps should be left to the Parks Commission for review and decision. Jurgens commented that with a large outlot it may create one giant access to the Luce Line Trail. Gaffron asked Fritzler about his experience with observing winter skiers use on the former Ski Tonka slopes since he lives across the Luce Line Trail. Fritzler replied there is more snowmobiler use coming off the Luce Line ridge and running up the hill and not from the owners or residents. It creates a spot where there is no enforcement. In the summer,there had been some dirt bike use some while ago but not recently. Also, horseback riders usually stay on the limestone or horse trail. Page 35 of 40