Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES <br />CITY OF ORONO <br />NOVEMBER 15, 1993 <br />project would be viable if they were required to construct it with a one unit per two acre <br />density. <br />Chairman Schroeder stated he supported the one unit per two acre density and he would like <br />to see tha project developed with that density. Commissioner Lindquist stated he concurred <br />with Chairman Schroeder and hj would have difficulty supporting the project as proposed. <br />Commissioner Nolan stated he thought the plan showed sensitivity to the area but the <br />density issue was something he had to agree with his ~ w commission 3 tn. The overall <br />density of the project was discussed. <br />Mr. Forbord commented that if the City was going to require a density of two acres per unit <br />this property would not be developed by Lundgren Brothers and would probably not be <br />developed at all given the expense of providing municipal utilities. He asked if the City was <br />saying that they did not want this property to develop at all. Chairman Schroeder responded <br />that they wanted to se? the land developed with fewer lots, but it was not accurate to say <br />that the City did not want the land to be developed at all. John Uban asked if the Planning <br />Commission would support a plan with multiple access from County Road 6, and all the <br />Commissioners responded negatively. Mr. Forbord stated that it was not the price of the <br />land which made it so expensive to develop the project, but the costs involved with the <br />grading costs, which were three times *:ne usual given the poor soils and the high water <br />table. He stated they believe the s'^e is ideal for a PUD zoning designation. Chairman <br />Schroeder stated that they would considei the plan with a reduced density. <br />Commissioner Peterson returned to the table. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS <br />14. Report by Planning Commission Representative to Council Meeting of November 8, 1993. <br />Chairman Schroeder reviewed the actions taken by the Council which included acceptance <br />of the Planning Commission recommendation regarding i; .» 1 ‘ots and staff had been directed <br />to draft an ordinance. He stated that the McKinney dupi* x was approved, although the City <br />Attorney had informed them tnat they could not legacy require owner occupancy. <br />15. Other issues for discussion. <br />There were* none.