My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-19-2000 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2000
>
01-19-2000 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2023 3:54:12 PM
Creation date
3/16/2023 3:44:28 PM
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.
/
394
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
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15,1999(#2550 Charles Van Eeckhout, Continued)the intent of the developer and City to extend sewer under the Luce Line Trail. City Staff will continue to work with the DNR on this Issue. Weinberger noted that the DNR does have some concerns regarding the extension of sewer under the Luce Line Trail due to future maintenanw <br />issues and would prefer the sewer extension be run along Brown Road. It is City’s Staff position <br />that the sewer be installed as proposed. <br />Weinberger stated the developer will also need to grant conservation and flowage easernents <br />across the wetlands and ponding areas located within the development, with restriction o'Jj^nd <br />alteration and removal of vegetation in all wetland areas and within 75 feet of Long Lake Creek. The <br />DNR Is requesting the Applicant dedicate a 50 foot conservation easement over the southern <br />portion of Lot 7. <br />Weinberger stated access to the property Is via Tract G, which is not currently owned by the <br />Applicant. Staff Is recommending that the owner of Tract G become a joint applicant, with the <br />corridor being replatted as part of the subdivision. The City Engineer and Director of Public <br />Services have recommended the entire access corridor be platted 50 feet in width to provide space <br />for future utilities along the private road. Upon review of the sketch plan by the City Council and <br />Planning Commission, it was determined that this development would be best served by access on <br />of Brown Road and not through the urban area in Long Lake. <br />Weinberger noted the Applicant has submitted additional documentation regarding Tract G for <br />review by the Planning Commission. Weinberger stated Long Lake Creek is a protected tnbutaiy <br />and requires a 75 foot setback for hardcover and structure. The driveway to serve Lot 7 would be <br />required to bridge the creek, with a variance being required for the alteration. <br />Park Dedication Fees would be calculated at the standard eight percent of the land value, with a <br />minimum park dedication fee per lot of $2,900 and a maximum of $4,900 per lot. <br />City Staff Is recommending that the application be tabled to allow the Applicant additional time to <br />resolve a number of complex issues, which includes the follows; A. The property owner of y^flct G <br />becomes a co-applicant and agrees to allowing the property to be replatted if he will remain the <br />owner subsequent to plat approval; B. More detailed engineering data Is required to enwre lots <br />will be provided with safe driveway access. The City recommends driveways not exceed a <br />ten percent slope;Stormwater calculations should be submitted for review to ensure the site <br />can treat ali runoff. Stormwater will flow directly to the Long Lake Creek which flows south <br />to Tanager Lake of Lake Minnetonka; D. City Staff, the applicant, and the DNR ® <br />permit can be Issued to cross the Luce Line Trail with sanitary sewer service to Fox R'^®- •' "J® <br />determined the sewer service cannot be completed, the City shall review alternatives; E. A grading <br />and erosion control plan shall be submitted for the entire site shall be submitted for additional <br />review. <br />Van Eeckhout stated he has attempted to meet with City Staff to resolve a number of these issues <br />but was unable to due to their busy schedules. Van Eeckhout stated a 40 foot road access was <br />approved previously by the City, with the City further approving installation of utilities to serve these <br />lots based on the zoning in effect at the time. Van Eeckhout noted that these utilities are curren y <br />In place and It would be costly to relocate them and realign the right-of-ways. In addition. <br />Van Eeckhout stated, based on legal advice, he has all the rights to build and maintain adequate <br />roads to serve this property without the need to make Mr. Dunn a co-applicant. <br />Van Eeckhout commented that it should not be a problem to construct a road over the wetland, <br />and requested that a variance granted based on the following reasons: one. since the access <br />Page 17
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.