Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF TI� <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 21,2011 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Staff recommends tabling the subdivision application subject to the applicant meeting the following <br /> � requirements: <br /> 1. Compliance with the City Engineer's recommendations. <br /> 2. Submittal of MCWD approved wetland delineations and functional assessment for all wetlands <br /> on the property. <br /> 3. Confirmation that the property contains a total of 10.0 dry,buildable acres. ` <br /> 4. Submittal of a conservation design plan which meets the requirements of the Conservation <br /> design regulations for review, approval and implementation. <br /> 5. Submittal of a revised subdivision survey indicating standard perimeter drainage and utility <br /> easements as well as conservation, flowage and drainage easements over all wetlands and <br /> wetland buffers on the property. Additionally,a 10-foot trail easement should be shown <br /> concurrent with the requested perimeter D/U easement along McCulley Road. <br /> Leskinen asked if the wetlands are deternuned to be incidental,whether the proposed driveway on Tract <br /> - B would be an issue. <br /> Curtis indicated it would not be and it would be likely a ditch along the road. There is a considerable <br /> wetland to the southwest of the driveway. Curtis indicated she did speak with the Watershed District and <br /> she felt that the applicant does have some work to do to show that these are incidental wetlands but that <br /> she is not convinced it will result in a WACA regulated wetland. If they are incidental,they would be <br /> allowed to cross it. <br /> Gherardi indicated she did speak with the Watershed District today and that part of this process is to <br /> prove that the wetlands are incidental. Gherardi indicated she has been assured by a number of people <br /> that this would be approved. The driveway is a proposed option and there are two other options that can <br /> be pursued. The third option,which is the least desirable for the two properties,is to have a shared <br /> driveway. <br /> Gherardi noted the existing home is being completely renovated and the other lot will be retained by her <br /> until the one lot is sold. <br /> Leskinen commented she is glad to hear the shared driveway is the least desired option. <br /> Levang asked where the trail easement would be located and whether that would impact the dry,buildable <br /> area. <br /> Curtis stated the trail easement would run along McCulley Road and that it would not impact the dry, <br /> . buildable area. <br /> Thiesse asked if there is any other easement the City has on that side of the road. <br /> Curtis stated not to her lrnowledge. <br /> Page <br /> 11 <br />