Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, July 10, 2017 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />14. #17-3944 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ON BEHALF OF UGORETS <br />8098 LLC, 2520 SHADYWOOD ROAD, REZONING AND MASTER PLAN APPROVAL - <br />Continued <br />Kirk Sherman, 2505 Old Beach Road, stated the Comprehensive Plan gave this piece of property that it <br />could potentially be RPUD. Sherman stated as you look at the overall plan and the discussion relating to <br />Navarre, that was a cautious approach. In that context, the authors noted things like traffic conditions and <br />the Comprehensive Plan specifically says that County Road 15 is far over capacity and it is not practical <br />or economical to increase it. Therefore, additional housing options will be primarily developed along <br />Orono's Highway 12 corridor. <br />Sherman noted there are two key factors embodied in the City's ordinances. Of paramount importance to <br />the citizens of the City is the preservation of Lake Minnetonka and wetlands. The disasterous effects of <br />intense residential and commercial development within the City and especially those areas adjacent to <br />Lake Minnetonka and the wetlands are painfully evident. The guiding principles of maintaining open <br />spaces, avoiding the ill effects of overcrowding, avoiding premature development, avoiding future <br />pollution problems which are inherent in any plan, to intensively develop land adjacent to wetlands and <br />Lake Minnetonka, and the need to change some allowed uses in order to preserve the quality of the <br />groundwater supplies in the area were recognized in the Comprehensive Plan. <br />Sherman stated at the time the Comprehensive Plan was done, these parameters were developed and this <br />site was identified as a possible location for RPUD. Sherman stated at the time the applicant created his <br />plan, he knew about the 30 -foot height requirement, the 3 -story requirement, the setbacks, the density <br />limitation, and the 5 -acre requirement. Sherman noted this RPUD requires a number of exceptions, <br />which is not the vision of the Comprehensive Plan, and to say that this parcel envisioned this type of <br />project is not accurate. <br />Sherman stated as it relates to the height, the Freshwater Institute is primarily a one-story building with a <br />small element that is taller, so this building is not comparable to the Freshwater Institute. Sherman stated <br />there was also discussion about how many stories will be visible from County Road 19. Sherman noted <br />the view from County Road 15 will be a 5 -story building. <br />Barnhart displayed a picture of the Freshwater Institute. <br />Sherman stated when you take the 58 feet in the back, they can see that it is hugely significant. Sherman <br />stated it is his belief that this property is higher than his, and for most of the year he can see the top <br />element of the Freshwater Institute. Sherman stated with this project he will have the potential of 60 feet <br />of building facing down into his yard blocking his view as well as the people coming around on County <br />Road 19. <br />Sherman encouraged the City Council to follow the recommendation of the Planning Commission. <br />Seals stated Mr. Sherman's house was one of the houses that she thought of when considering this project <br />and that she has been to his property in the past. Seals stated when someone looks up from that property <br />to this area, you would see part of the Freshwater Institute and you would probably be seeing a lot of this <br />proposed building from that lot. <br />Page 9 of 14 <br />