Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,August 18,2014 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Leskinen asked if both entrances would be considered public entrances. <br /> Mack stated the architect would be able to address that. <br /> Lemke asked if the City has any regulations regarding outdoor patio areas outside of restrictions on <br /> obstructions to traffic. <br /> Mack stated he is not aware of any. <br /> Gaffron stated the City did have a similar discussion on the Narrows application and that he does not <br /> believe there are any specific code provisions that address outdoor patios. Gaffron stated in the Narrows <br /> situation there was no real useable area located within the Narrows property along North Shore Drive and <br /> the request for a patio in that area was subsequently withdrawn. Gaffron stated in this case the applicant <br /> has a fair amount of area available on their property for an outdoor patio. <br /> Mack stated the sidewalk area in this application would remain unobstructed. <br /> Thiesse stated he believes Hennepin County would have some sight line requirements. <br /> Mack stated Staff will look into that further and inquire with Hennepin County on that aspect of the <br /> application. Mack stated the City Engineer will also be reviewing that. <br /> Leskinen asked if there is any parking allowed along that section of Shoreline Drive. <br /> Gaffron stated he did not observe any no parking signs in the photographs. <br /> Mack stated the shoulder in that area is very narrow and would not accommodate a vehicle. <br /> Leskinen asked if that is a bicycle lane or the shoulder. <br /> Mack indicated that is the edge of the parking lane with a narrow shoulder. <br /> Leskinen and Landgraver stated they would like to see no parking signs installed in that area of Shoreline <br /> Drive. <br /> McGrann asked whether the neighbor who submitted the letter also expressed concerns about noise. <br /> Mack stated the concerns were related just related to traffic. Mack noted the letter submitted was not <br /> from the adjacent property owner and that no comments were received from the adjoining residential <br /> property owner. <br /> Lemke asked where the service access to the restaurant would be located. <br /> Mack stated the architect would be able to address that but that there would be limited access in the front. <br /> Lemke stated the green space does not provide any access and that he has a concern a delivery truck may <br /> park too close to the corner. <br /> Page 7 of 33 <br />