Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, October 20, 2014 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />Page 8 of 28  <br />  <br />Grittman indicated the proposed grading plan is primarily for the roads and for the driveways in some <br />areas but that it is conceptual based on the final location of the house plans. The house plans would be <br />prepared custom site by site. <br /> <br />Leskinen stated her concern relating to that is the lack of an overall grading plan. Leskinen asked if the <br />City had another development that did not have an overall grading plan and issues developed with regard <br />to finding what the established grade or original grade was for determining stories. <br /> <br />Gaffron indicated the City has had both situations. Gaffron stated the existing grades that are naturally <br />occurring on the site are what would be used for determining the number of stories and height of the <br />homes. The City has also had situations where the grading plan created a new starting point for <br />measuring height. In this case the applicants are not proposing to do the individual lot creation, and as <br />each individual lot is built upon, they will be basing the height and measurements on the existing grade. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit asked what percentage of the lots will require variances. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated there should not be variances required for any of the lots except for the seven lots that are <br />below the lot width requirement. Gaffron stated to his understanding Sheet 301 shows two different types <br />of buildings and that the darker shades are walkouts and the lighter shades are lookouts. Gaffron stated <br />the applicant has provided sample grading for each lot but a house on a given site could be relocated <br />somewhat depending on the location of the septic sites and well. <br /> <br />Grittman indicated Staff has asked for this amount of detail at this stage to show that they could develop <br />the lot without asking for variances. <br /> <br />Thiesse asked if the tree inventory is based only on the development that is going to occur and not on the <br />houses that will be placed on the lots. <br /> <br />Grittman stated the tree removals are based on the grading that is shown as part of the plat. <br /> <br />David Nash, Engineer, stated what they show currently is based on the grading plan for the driveways and <br />houses and that the proposed number of trees to be removed is very close to the final. <br /> <br />Thiesse noted if the property owner decides to relocate the house, there may be some additional impacts. <br /> <br />David Martini stated the majority of Staff’s comments are looking down the road when final approval is <br />requested on the plat. Martini stated one of the first comments relates to traffic. A traffic study was <br />prepared for the project and in summary it basically shows that the development itself is not going to <br />contribute enough traffic at any of the existing roads to change the level of service at any of the existing <br />intersections. All of the intersections currently operate at an A or a B level and that should remain the <br />same following development of both golf courses. <br /> <br />Martini stated the one thing from a traffic standpoint that is being anticipated is that the access onto West <br />Branch Road will require a right turn lane for the westbound traffic, which is not identified in the traffic <br />report but would likely be required by the County. <br /> <br />In addition, Staff has requested more information related to compacted soils on the site and drain tiles, <br />which goes toward storm water management and understanding the existing conditions. As it relates to <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 11/17/2014 <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes 10/20/2014 <br />[Page 8 of 28]