04-28-1997 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON APRIL 14,1997 (U6 - #2212 Rebers - Continued) Pflam said the applicant's major objection to the frontage road is the property is zoned commercial and already has legal access to Hwy 12. The applicant does not currently have plans for Outlot F and would agree to revisit the frontage road issue when that property is developed. Pflam said the applicant is seeking a buyer who would use the entire property rather than subdivide it into smaller lots. Pflam said the service road is laid out for use by a large number of businesses and, as such, would not be needed if only one business was developed on Outlot F. Pflam asked for approval of the outlot to buildable lot status. The applicant does not want to reorient the lot to the rear and lose Hwy 12 access. Pflam said he felt the Chy does not have the resources to fund the service road. Pflam said the comprehensive plan has been affected dramatically by the relocation proposal of Hwy 12. Pflam indicated it was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting for a right turn in and out with a median. Conunissioners raised the question of relocatmg the access to the west to line up with Brimhall. Pflam said he discussed this possibility with Mn/DOT, who owns the triangular piece of property. The applicant has applied for a permit fix ’ such an access. Pflam indicated the median is wide enough to support a stacking lane if needed. Pflam said this access could be used by the Rebers and Otten properties. Pflam asked for approval of the replat to a buildable lot without loss of access to Hwy 12. He said the applicant is prepared to meet all conditions including the 60' wide ri^- of-way for a future road or trail. Cliflf Otten said he agrees with the plan as presented by Pflam for access. He said he does not see any need for a service road. Otten and Rebers informed Jabbour that thqr wtr< planning their properties in light of the Alternate 6 proposal for Hwy 12. rc Kelley asked for clarification on the covenants on the property if an easement was granted. Gaffron reviewed the easement limitations as noted on page 4 of the 4/10/97 memo. Goetten noted she agreed with Staff regarding the service road but questioned whether the City can legally enforce it with the pre-existing conditions. Radio said he thou^ it would be difficult for the City to require construction of the service road. Kelley asked if the applicant would be willing to combine access for the bank property (Outlot E) with the Wear property. Pflam said he would be willing to discuss this possibility with Staff and Planning Commission. Ke’.ley was concerned that people would drive through the Wear lot to the bank property. Pflam said a barrier could be built