Laserfiche WebLink
CITY OF ORONO <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,May 15,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Thiesse commented the Planning Commission can certainly recommend to the City Council that they <br /> allow it, but that he is not ready to do that. <br /> Schoenzeit stated the applicant can plead his case to the City Council. <br /> Thiesse asked if the fact that it will be as good or better than the adjoining land is an acceptable reason to <br /> allow it. <br /> Schwingler stated it is an acceptable answer to him. <br /> Leskinen asked if an engineer can sign off on a well thought out landscape plan. <br /> Thiesse stated they would run a stability analysis. <br /> Leskinen noted the Planning Commission is not requiring retaining walls be put in and that they are just <br /> requiring that the plan that is presented be certified by a professional engineer. <br /> Schoenzeit stated on the flip side,the City almost has nothing to say about it when it has been reviewed at <br /> that high level, which is the purpose of the engineer's signature. <br /> Schwingler stated in his view it is a well thought out solution and that it is landscaping. <br /> Thiesse asked if the Planning Commission would even see this if they were not moving that much ground <br /> in the 75-foot setback. <br /> Curtis indicated that is correct. Curtis noted within the 75-foot setback,the administrative threshold is 50 <br /> cubic yards. Within the Shoreland beyond the 75-foot setback, the administrative threshold is 500 cubic <br /> yards. Curtis stated the permitting threshold is 50 cubic yards and that anything less than that outside of <br /> the 75-foot setback would not require a permit. Curtis stated it is the proximity to the lake and the <br /> amount of material that is proposed to be moved that triggers the conditional use permit. <br /> Curtis stated because there were solutions proposed such as the drainage pipe and the catch basin devices, <br /> Staff advised the applicant that he needs an engineer. Curtis stated once those engineering solutions were <br /> proposed, Staff requires an engineering review. <br /> Barnhart stated the City wants some assurance that it solves the problem and at this point Staff has no <br /> confidence that it will. Barnhart stated Staff wants to make sure it does not do further damage to the <br /> slope. <br /> Leskinen stated given the amount of analysis that is needed, she is inclined to go along with Staff's <br /> recommendation and would err on the side of caution. <br /> Thiesse indicated he also is leaning that way. <br /> Page 17 of 23 <br />