Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,April 17,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> accessory structures and buildings, etc., do not trigger the Wetland Protection Rule and therefore the <br /> Watershed District does not require a buffer if one was not already established. <br /> The City has established a 10-foot setback from the buffer or 35 feet from the wetland edge, whichever is <br /> greater. This setback is intended to protect water quality and to separate manmade improvements from <br /> the natural features of the land. The ten feet is intended to prevent structures placed in such a way that <br /> impacts the no-touch characteristics of the buffer and allows property owners to walk or move equipment <br /> between a structure and the buffer. <br /> With respect to buffers,there are three primary options: <br /> Option 1: Recognizing that the Watershed District's focus is regional and the City's is smaller, retain the <br /> existing setback requirements. Make no changes to buffers. <br /> Option 2: Recognizing the City's role in water quality protection,yet balance the need for use of land, <br /> reduce the setback to 22 feet where no buffer is required or has been established. 22 feet is <br /> nine and one half feet more than the shortest possible buffer required by the Watershed District <br /> for residential properties. Plus, 22 feet is a memorable setback, less likely to be lost in the <br /> mind of the applicant, to the benefit of protecting the wetland. <br /> Option 3: Completely defer buffer requirements to the Watershed District and remove the requirement of <br /> a setback from undeclared buffers and the additional ten feet from declared buffers. <br /> Staff does not recommend eliminating setbacks from wetland edges as this would allow an improvement <br /> at the wetland boundary, offering no protection to the wetland, or the improvement due to wetland bounce <br /> and poor soil conditions. Staff can support a reduction in the setback, which balances the goals of water <br /> quality and use of the property. <br /> Written comments have been received and are included in the Commission's packet. <br /> Barnhart noted the majority of the changes can be found on Page 3, Lines 90 through 99, which talks <br /> about Tier I versus Tier 2 delineations and when those type of delineations would be required. The chart <br /> incorporates Option 2 and provides some idea of the impact of the changes. Staff is looking for feedback <br /> tonight from the Planning Commission on this item. <br /> Lemke asked what constitutes a wetland. <br /> Barnhart stated there are several criteria that establish the presence of a wetland, such as the presence of <br /> water, soils, and certain vegetation. Those characteristics help establish the type of wetland. <br /> Lemke asked whether they could look at the dead vegetation to establish a wetland. <br /> Barnhart indicated the vegetation needs to be actively living. Barnhart stated currently the City has a <br /> Type I and a Type II wetland. Barnhart indicated he did not utilize that language since the Bureau of Soil <br /> and Water has a Type I and a Type II wetland and he did not want to confuse the two. Currently the <br /> ordinance allows for a desk review, when those would be used, as well as provide some direction to Staff <br /> on how those are employed. Barnhart stated a Tier 2 wetland delineation would be as required by the <br /> Watershed District, and as with any decision Staff makes,the applicant can appeal that decision. <br /> Page 37 of 48 <br />