Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Tuesday, February 18, 2020 <br />6:00 p.m. <br />Libby stated that the reason he shared his historical perspectives earlier is because of the comments that <br />the northerly lots did not have lakeshore access. He stated that it is actually quite the contrary, because if <br />you actually go into the lagoon, with a watercraft, and look at the way the docks are situated, there is not a <br />depravation of lake shore access to those northerly lots. <br />Thiesse stated that he cannot get behind separating lots to create substandard lots. He stated that the <br />Commission could spend all day talking about it because it is a great idea, but it is creating substandard <br />lots. He stated that he feels the Council will probably say no to this plan. <br />Libby stated that the 2 front lots are owned by different parties and if they were combined then the front <br />lot would be conforming so there could be 3 lots. <br />Mr. Gamble stated that he sees Commissioner Thiesse's point that it becomes nonconforming by drawing <br />a line through the pond and yet they are more conforming than any of the neighbors. <br />Thiesse stated that he is not arguing that point, but it is not just up to him or the Commission. <br />Mr. Gamble stated that he cannot see another way to make this more conforming. He is asking for <br />guidance from the Commission on what he can do. <br />Bollis stated that his only suggestion is to try to combine the 2 southern pieces. <br />Libby asked if these lots were seasonally wet. <br />Mr. Gamble stated that there was a type of soil that was identified as having sat under water at some <br />point. He stated that he spoke with the County who put in a culvert that changed the drainage of the <br />property in the area. He stated that the County told them that it is not their water after it comes out of the <br />pipe. <br />Ressler stated that the biggest thing the Commission has regarding feedback is that variances exist for <br />mitigating reasons. He stated that he wants Mr. Gamble to know that his points have been heard. He <br />stated that he cannot discourage Mr. Gamble from applying, but historically speaking this type of thing <br />has been opposed and denied. He stated that this will ultimately be at the discretion of the Council. <br />Erickson stated that he and Commissioner Thiesse have come to the exact same conclusion for exact <br />opposite reasons. He stated that he is not concerned about the 2 homes to the south continuing to be 2 <br />homes to the south. He stated that he is very concerned about the traffic levels on County Road 15 and <br />creating another access there and agrees with the County transportation department's statement regarding <br />access. He stated that he thinks the problem with access is why this land has been for sale for so many <br />years and nobody bought it because people most likely do not want to build a new home on a road that <br />has 20,000 cars a day driving by. He stated that even if Mr. Gamble could get this approved, he thinks it <br />would be a property that would be forever discounted and does not feel this is suitable for privately <br />owned single-family home. He stated that he sees this being more suitable for a multi -family rental or <br />small office building use but would still need a way to deal with the access issues. <br />Libby stated that the Hennepin County plan for Shoreline Drive and the intersection at 19 and 15, will <br />have the right-of-way changed significantly as well as the construction and reorientation of the <br />Page 24 of 30 <br />