Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,May 17,2021 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> area and lot width and both parcels would meet the minimum 20,000 square feet in size.Analysis shows <br /> lot 1 might be higher in structural coverage and impervious surface which is one area they need to look at. <br /> The proposed development on the east side is in concept stage and appears to meet the requirements in <br /> terms of hardcover but there seemed to be an impact from a setback standpoint.The proposed layout <br /> would likely require variances for hardcover and structural coverage for the existing building,and the side <br /> yard setback from Kelly Parkway. Staff is looking for sketch plan feedback that would be carried forward <br /> to the City Council and then to the applicant. <br /> McCutcheon said it is a one story building and asked if they wanted,could they have a two story <br /> building? <br /> Barnhart said if it met the requirements of setbacks and other factors,yes,they possibly could. From a <br /> commercial standpoint in going more than one level it starts adding parking requirements. <br /> Bollis asked why subdivide and not a PUD or a different type? <br /> Barnhart said it is six-of-one and a-half-dozen of the other in terms of process. One is a re-zoning and <br /> public hearing and this is the path the applicant chose. <br /> Corey Englund,Reprise Design,2400 Portland Ave. S,Burnsville,is with the architecture group on <br /> behalf of the applicant.This is a vacant lot that is used to sell fireworks on occasion, but is otherwise a <br /> dusty,empty lot.The site is somewhat challenging because there is a retaining wall dividing the north and <br /> south portion of the lot;they are somewhat restricted in developing any kind of a driveway.He thinks this <br /> is a good use of an empty lot but before they proceed with anything they need to know that it is feasible <br /> from a platting standpoint and would like to assess if the variances would be supported. There will be <br /> some difficulties as stated,with hardscape coverage,and on the existing lot with structural coverage. <br /> Libby asked on the Kelly side,there is a fairly substantial grade,that is natural topography as they could <br /> not put a driveway in there.He said the adjacent property is the liquor store. <br /> Mr. Englund replied yes. <br /> McCutcheon noted since the retaining wall would be shared between both properties,for future use of <br /> perhaps a loading dock,has the applicant put any thought into how they would use the space to the south. <br /> Mr. Englund thinks the southern space will have an egress ability for the other lot but will mostly remain <br /> as-is for now because of the topographic difficulties, about 5-6 feet of grade change from the upper lot to <br /> the lower lot. <br /> Barnhart clarified they would not suggest much more development south of the existing retaining wall <br /> because then they are starting to encroach in the residential district and they want to be cautious of those <br /> impacts. <br /> Kirchner asked if they are adding 4 new parking stalls. <br /> Mr.Englund replied yes,parallel stalls. <br /> Page 19 of 21 <br />