My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-11-2017 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2017
>
09-11-2017 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2019 8:02:13 AM
Creation date
5/29/2019 7:49:04 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
242
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, August 21, 2017 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />Schoenzeit stated it would nice to see a development require less of a topographical change. Schoenzeit <br />stated the take -away from tonight's meeting is that eight is the upper limit for this property <br />Lemke stated his concern is that the number of units proposed does not work without city sewer and from <br />that standpoint it is not a viable plan. Lemke stated he likes the two acres per unit and that he does not <br />agree with what has been proposed. <br />Schwingler stated he is not in favor of deviating from the Community Management Plan and that the <br />developer should look at creating the number of lots that are allowed under the current zoning. <br />Thiesse noted this property is not dense enough to be included in the MUSA, and if it was allowed, it <br />would require the City to find higher density elsewhere in the community. Thiesse stated the site is <br />located in a very rural area and that he is having some difficulty with the density. <br />Landgraver stated this Planning Commission has been very true to the Comprehensive Plan and have <br />attempted to preserve the openness of Orono. The Planning Commission also unanimoously voted <br />against the increase in structural coverage. Landgraver stated what is unique about Orono is the sense of <br />openness and the rural character, which the Planning Commission has been consistent with. <br />Landgraver stated in his view it is too much density for this area. Landgraver stated he recognizes that <br />Long Lake has some denser developments nearby, but that Orono is responsible for Orono. Landgraver <br />stated to the extent they can develop this property consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, that is what <br />should be done. <br />Thiesse asked if the City would have authority over view shed or tree removal. <br />Barnhart stated development of this site would likely trigger the Conservation Design criteria. <br />The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item. <br />Thiesse, Chair <br />Page 7 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.