10-19-2020 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, September 21,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. complementary to the community. He noted the more the development can look and feel like a rural community he better off they will all be. Mr. Saddiqui said if anyone is in Maple Grove in the future, he asked them to please visit the Donagal development,where the buildings are detached townhomes which are eight feet apart and it will give a glimpse the product,the aesthetics, mix and multiple elevations, color and materials they have come up with. He said it is a very impressive and well-received landscape of architecture and noted they are selling like hotcakes all across the country, because they are addressing what people are looking for in suburban living with urban looks. Libby said the design is considered to be an urban, medium-to-high density residential mixed use. Erickson said historically, about 15 years ago, he served on a volunteer citizens committee that was a joint committee between Long Lake and Orono and they were looking at alternatives and design features for the County Road 112 improvement. One of his positions was trying to get funding for as much buried utilities along Wayzata Boulevard as he possibly could. He succeeded in Long Lake and it's beautiful and noted he also tried along this part of Wayzata Boulevard from Willow to Old Crystal Bay Road and succeeded only in a little section where the storm-water pond is. He was told by Mr. Barnhart's predecessor that they'd get the developers to do the rest of it, and he hasn't seen that. He said if it could somehow be done, it would beautify that project in that area much more effectively than five more feet of setback. 8. LA20-000060 CITY OF ORONO TEXT AMENDMENT RELATED TO AMENDMENTS TO VARIANCES. STAFF: JEREMY BARNHART. Barnhart said when the Commission reviews a variance,they see the plans attached. When those variances are approved,those plans are attached to the resolution. Occasionally some minor changes need to be made that are identified during the construction process. If those changes are minor but still would require a variance, Staff has taken those through the City Council process and at an open meeting, Council can say this minor change is appropriate and they are going to amend the resolution. If it's a major change,they go through the process of public hearings and all of that. He said that is the practice they've been doing for 15-20 years. The City Code technically doesn't allow that practice, and the City Attorney has suggested they adjust the code to allow that practice just described(Planning Staff makes a determination if a proposed amendment is appropriate or minor, if the Council concurs,they can approve that minor change, if not,they can remand it back through the public hearing process. He noted this ordinance codifies what Barnhart has just described. Staff recommends approval as drafted. Gettman asked Barnhart how they continue to document the minor changes. Barnhart replied they re-publish the resolution with new drawings. He said the reason they're doing this for the variance process is because State statute doesn't require public hearing for variances, it is Orono's own rule, so in the City Attorney's view they can adjust it that way. Chair Ressler noted the scope is two-fold, one is to preserve time, because it seemed to be a minor change, and two being mindful that if there is something the Council would like the Commission's feedback,they can send it back to them. He said it doesn't relieve the Commission of being able to weigh in if the Council has discretion and opinion to do so. Page 26 of 27