04-10-1995 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON APRIL 10, 1995 40 ( 97 - Shelter - Continued) A shelter representative notified the Council that the promise of state funding has been extended to August. The project needs to meet this deadline. Dan Hessburg reported concern on the landowner's part on the status of the sale of the property. Shelter representatives were informed that a zoning amendment would not hinder their time frame for the project. Mabusth reported that a public hearing would need to be held prior to rezoning, which needs a 4 /5th majority vote. Mabusth said two options would be presented, one option an amendment of residential code and the other with a zoning change to commercial, specifically to look at B -4 code. Callahan polled the Council on their opinion of rezoning to B -4 commercial with the requirement of a CUP. Hurr was not opposed to looking at this option and would like to hear from the public and the Planning Commission before a vote. Mabusth reported that the public hearing would be held by the Planning Commission. Goetten also was not opposed to looking at the pros and cons of the option and would like to hear the opinion of the City Attorney. Jabbour concurred with the other members of the Council. The public hearing will be scheduled for May. • ( #8) USE OF CITY DRIVEWAY FOR ACCESS TO PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT (MELAMED) Mr. Melamed was present. The issue before the Council was to determine if this proposed development should be allowed access via use of the City driveway. The property in question is the 15 acre Carpenter property to the east of Old Crystal Bay Road and on the north side of the entrance to French Creek preserve. The sketch plan presented two options. Mabusth reported that the first option consisted of a cul -de -sac, which would have a major impact on the land, requiring the filling of 2400 s.f. of wetland and removal of 640 trees. The applicant has reviewed option two with Hennepin County DOT, who has approved two curb -cuts, one shared and the other to serve lot 3; lot 4 shall achieve access via the use of the City driveway. Mabusth said that the issue is the code requirements if City drive were to receive a third residential curb cut. The City's desire to keep the drive private would be impacted and would bring more traffic into the park area. Council is first asked if they approve an additional curb cut and what upgrades of drive would be requested. 5