My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-14-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
06-14-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 11:14:59 AM
Creation date
1/25/2023 8:56:22 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.
/
627
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
CITY of ORONO <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br />NO.Fi ' >if * mm ».» ..rf <br />11. Substantial runoff from the adjoining properties to the east flows westward over <br />the property. Incorporation of drainage swales is necessary along the driveway <br />to accommodate this drainage. <br />12. Because the property includes a signiflcant length of creek which flows to Lake <br />Minnetonka, the incorporation of vegetative buffers for stormwater treatment is <br />appropriate. The applicant has proposed a 35' buffer adjacent to cither side of <br />the creek, which will be subject to a buffer casement. <br />13. The topography of the site indicates a steep hill at the south end of Lot 1, and <br />the proposed driveway will skirt the base of this hill. Neighbors have expressed <br />a contem whether this area might be buildable. The slope is approximately 40% <br />in some areas, and portions of it may meet the definition of a bluff, which <br />would be unbuildable area. The area southeast of the creek within Lot I with <br />slopes of 18% or greater should be deemed as non-buildablc. <br />14. A park fee of $200 was paid for the existing Lot 1 when it was created in 1990 <br />per the ordinance in place at that time, and no park fee was paid for Lot 2. on <br />the basis that I.ot 2 had previously had a house on it. Because the current <br />application is primanly a lot line rearrangement between two existing lots of <br />record, no park fees should be due with the current application. <br />15. Because the subdivision is primarily the rearrangement of tw .' existing lots in <br />order to make the northerly lot buildable, the argument can be made that only <br />the newly buildable lot (Lot 1) should be subject to the 3tonn Water anu <br />Drainage Trunk Fee which is charged tor land being developed. <br />16. Based on the above findings and appropriate conditions of approval, the <br />proposed re-plat will result in two lots suitable for ihe construction of single <br />family residences without the need for further variances. <br />e <br />f <br />Page 4 of 9
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.