01-16-1984 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

McDonald - You would also have less cars, less people, less services and less chance of the sower and the Met Council saying ”My God what is Orono doing". You know.. Rovegno - Jeanne, could you comment on using 84 and McCulley Road as accesses, um your talking 300* lots on just a square - so you would have one driveway every 300* or a double driveway every 600* feet. Which the City would probably prefer. Mabusth - Shared, you bet. Rovegno - As far as the planning point of view, separate and distinct from our zoning rules and the rest, I guess I *m kinda in a quandary about the whole thing. Mabusth - What is your question, your problem? Rovegno - This is a real attractive plan, certainly not the same as the rest of the neighborhood out there, but it really is a nice p*an. McDonald ~ (LOUDLY) Well it is a nice plan - you could put in 50 more homes and it still would be nice. (Laughter from crowd) Really it would thats not the point. Mabusth - Are you saying that you like the fact that ail lots are served by interior roads. Rovegno - Yes, and they curve and linear and they use the land and they stay away from steep slopes. All the stuff that the City likes.. Goetten Mabusth - All the things in the new subdivision regulations. If indeed you look at five acre zoning and you say take away the loop road, put up a cul de sac, one or two cul de sac roads, you would have two phases again, the larger lots. There are all kinds of ways it can be done. It can be done. I think Ron has done it before himself. Ican*t remember what the road was like Ron. Ron has dealt with this property with Ski Tonka and other investors. It never came before the P.C. and was never a formal plat. It was how many lots, that first one? Bastyr - I can show you the lots that were added if that will help... Mabusth - It was not a very attractive plan. Bastyr - Here you have the amenity package thats . . . adding 7 lots and one other house. They would still plan for all the houses to be placed on the ridge. First of all these 4 houses..... TAPE 2 Bastyr ~ The remaining houses on the ridge line would be there any ways even if they proposed the 5 acre zoning. So by giving up the PUD they are giving up the amenity package just by losing the houses that people can't see anyway. I guess wc feel that this site is so unique in the fact that its by itself. The only additional lots that we are asking for are the ones that can only be seen by lots that are lesser in size than the ones we are I I