Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEEETING <br /> Monday, September 19, 2016 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Leskinen stated in her view it is a nice looking development for the location. Leskinen stated in looking <br /> at the aerial photos of the parcel and the surrounding areas, the development appears to fit in there nicely <br /> and that she does not have any huge concerns with the density. Leskinen stated the site transitions well <br /> and the applicant has put a lot of thought into their proposal. Leskinen stated she also likes the <br /> stormwater management and that overall the plan is promising. <br /> Thiesse stated he agrees that a lot of thought has gone into the development but that he is not completely <br /> sure on the density. <br /> Schwingler commented he is also struggling with the density and the impact of the development on the <br /> lake given its current situation. Schwingler stated he likes the stormwater designs but that he struggles <br /> with the density <br /> Lemke stated he also feels the same way about the density and that it seems to be an abrupt change from <br /> what is on the other side of the road. Lemke noted right across the street is extremely low density. <br /> Lemke stated he understands the applicants are trying to echo what is on the other side of the road but that <br /> in his view it is too jammed in there. <br /> Goodrum stated they shared the same concern but that they are not just looking at Sugar Woods. <br /> Goodrum stated as someone comes out the driveway, they will see a three-story senior apartment <br /> building, and then next to that are the townhomes and then Long Lake after that. Goodrum stated in their <br /> view they blend in with Sugar Woods and the other areas. <br /> Olson asked whether any traffic impact studies have been done. <br /> Goodrum indicated they have not done a full-blown traffic study. Goodrum noted Westwood <br /> Engineering has traffic engineers on staff and they do not believe there will any significant impacts. <br /> Goodrum stated they can look into it further. <br /> Thiesse stated he questioned what the right density was for the property and that he arbitrarily eliminated <br /> four lots but that it really did not change the character of the property since there will still be the road and <br /> the cul-de-sac. Thiesse stated he is leaning more towards liking it than disliking it at this time. <br /> Thiesse asked about private versus public road. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the road should be made to public road standards. <br /> Lemke asked why Staff prefers public if Sugar Woods is private. <br /> Gaffron stated part of that relates to the proposed density and that Staff considers this to be an urban <br /> density project. Gaffron stated in two-acre and tive-acre developments, the City has almost exclusively <br /> gone with private roads. Gaffron stated it is a departure from the characteristics of Orono's rural density <br /> and that he would suggest it be a public road. <br /> Thiesse stated he dislikes giving recommendations without knowledge of what the neighbors think. <br /> Thiesse asked whether any of the neighbors have been approached regarding the project. <br /> Page 12 of 23 <br />