Laserfiche WebLink
iiXMms OP THE puunmK coMNissioa !TIBG MEHCH 20, 1989 <br />xoaiMG PILE «i386-onrai coariEUBD <br />Chairman Kelley asked for Input regarding a separate <br />entrance off of Willow. Bellows believed that it would create <br />too much congestion in that area. Mabusth stated that the City <br />would not allow a separate access. Kelley asked how far the <br />east/west road had to be from Highway 12. Mabusth said that she <br />recollected it to be 300'. Kelley asked for input regarding an <br />entrance/exit off of Highway 12. Brown indicated that he liked <br />that less than the Willow Drive access. <br />Mr. Otten said that the time was right to be discussing a <br />proposed entrance/exit off of Highway 12 because of the proposed <br />upgrading. MN DOT indicated that they would base their plans <br />around Orono's decision for Mr. Otten's property access. Mr. <br />Otten proposed at a minimum a right turn entrance/exit, but not a <br />full intersection. Kelley indicated that he would not be opposed <br />to such a plan. Bellows did not believe that an entrance/exit <br />off of Highway 12 would be required. Mr. Otten questioned why it <br />would be necessary to bring people all the way through the <br />intersection, if they could avoid it. Bellows would prefer the <br />access to be the service road access already designated off of <br />Willow. Mr. Otten intented that proposed road to remain as an <br />outlet designation until such time Mr. Rebers put in his road and <br />until the status of Lot 2 is determined. Bellows asked Mr. *;tten <br />whether he would be willing to relocate his entry. Mr. Otten <br />agreed. <br />Chairman Kelley read a list of the acceptable uses within a <br />B-1 zoning. Mr. Otten pointed out that the B-6 incorporated <br />those uses and felt that there was no point in waiting for the B- <br />6. With respect to a PUD zoning, it was Mr. Otten's <br />understanding that it was his option whether he wanted a PUD; not <br />that it was mandatory. <br />Mr. Joel Walvatne, 710 Dickey Lake Drive, questioned whether <br />adequate screening would be provided between his property and the <br />garden center. Mr. Otten showed the Planning Commission pictures <br />showing how the existing vegetation already provides screening. <br />Mr. Otten said he would not be opposed to additional screening if <br />necessary, but due to what is existing, his plans do not show <br />anything additional. In addition to the vegetation, there is a <br />large berm separating Mr. Otten's property from Mr. Walvatne's. <br />Mr. Chuck McKay, 725 Dickey Lake Drive, expressed his <br />approval of Mr. Otten's proposal. He asked for clarification <br />regarding the service road. Kelley informed him that it was Mr. <br />Otten's intention not to install the service road until <br />everything to the east of the property is developed. <br />Planning Commissioner Johnson asked whether the initial <br />plans showed the service road through the middle of the property? <br />Mr. Otten explained that initially that was being proposed. <br />However, when the required 60' of road and additional setbacks <br />from the road were taken into consideration, it would have used <br />3