Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,March 16,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Libby said he talked to the City Engineer at the time because the installation of the new pump and system <br /> caused him to have a steel plate put over his driveway, so he got an up-close and personal look at it.He <br /> asked if that system had the capacity for 7 additional properties. <br /> Barnhart said that it could but they do not know yet.That level of analysis is not done at the time of a <br /> sketch plan.He is optimistic and pretty confident that the site will be served,although he does not know <br /> exactly how. Those answers will be given by the time it gets to the preliminary plat. <br /> Libby said Lot 3 already has a sewer system serving the primary estate now.He noted it might be a <br /> question for the City Engineer. <br /> Barnhart indicated the applicant had a meeting with the neighborhood in the past week to inform them <br /> about what is going on. If the project moves forward,the neighbors will also get a notice from the City. <br /> Mr.Tim Whitten, Whitten Associates,said he appreciates the opportunity to be in front of the Planning <br /> Commission to discuss any concerns in general about the project before they go to the next level.Their <br /> intent was to present something to the City that fits the ordinances of the City.He noted they have had a <br /> neighborhood meeting and they had a couple of comments from people that could not make the meeting. <br /> All the comments they heard were pretty positive. <br /> Libby asked, from both a development standpoint and Hennepin County recommendation standpoint,if <br /> Whitten favored any of the proposals that Hennepin County brought forward in the narrative they <br /> provided the City Engineer. <br /> Mr. Whitten stated the only entrance is the one off of 15.Looking at the topography,using Heritage Lane, <br /> how long that cul-de-sac already is and how many homes it serves,it does not make a lot of sense. If you <br /> look hard at the turn-lane element,they have a lot to look at from an engineering perspective such as <br /> traffic and trees.He thinks they have identified most setbacks as far as wetlands and steep slopes,etc.He <br /> noted there are a lot of engineering questions that need to be answered as they move forward. <br /> Ressler indicated they are trying to give this a 30,000-foot view before they spend more money.His <br /> feedback is that it looks right.He appreciates the applicant's desire to be compliant.He hears loud and <br /> clear that being connected to the City sewer is a major component. It has not been determined how,but <br /> the support would change in the event it was not. <br /> Libby noted that,in addition to the estate-style housing sites,there is intrinsic lakeshore and it is marketed <br /> as being a little over 700 linear feet,which is what the current property ownership has on Smith Bay.He <br /> said there are intentions for only 3 residents to have docks, and asked for clarification on how many docks <br /> per resident there would be in a proposal or a plan. <br /> Ressler asked Mr. Whitten if they are at that point yet,to which Mr. Whitten indicated they are not. <br /> Libby clarified that his question was not for the applicant but,rather,the marketer of the development, <br /> because there has been large and prominent signage for a long time that people are able to see. <br /> Barnhart pointed out that there are 4 lake lots; 3 lots on Smith Bay to the south, and 1 lot on Tanager. <br /> Page 15 of 16 <br />