Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />January 17, 2023 <br />6:00 o'clock p.m. <br />McCutcheon said he appreciated that the applicants are willing to work with the landowner to the west <br />because it really looks like it's going to be a compromise between both parcels. <br />Libby asked if they have pursued looking at an egress from Kelly Ave. <br />Mr. Gronberg said it sounds like a good idea but who knows if those owners would be willing to give up <br />access there. And then Brett would then have to give up access across his property to the right property of <br />the West. <br />Mr. Larsen said they work through the Ciry with building permits, and wanted to be can -do. We didn't ask <br />for a variance. We tried to do everything outside of the setback. We had to scrap the existing house, fill in <br />the foundation and do a new foundation in order to accomplish all that. We did have the same approach <br />here. I've talked to Scott Edwards. We've talked about sharing that curb cut, if that makes this easier to do. <br />Our strong preference would be to work with Mr. Edwards to find a way that we can access 15. <br />And we have spoken with the LMCD, and they are telling us that a dock is doable. <br />Erickson said as a point of information, reviewing the previous comments from Hennepin County a <br />couple of years ago, the question was raised about the right -of --way for County 15. Hennepin County <br />might want possibly another 12 feet ofright-of--way, which then in discussing that, they also pointed out <br />that they didn't want to see any retaining walls are along that stretch of 15 for sightline visibility. <br />Oakden said the County had asked fora 45-foot from centerline and now it's 33 foot so they'd ask for <br />additional right -of -way, and that they wouldn't want any structural improvements in that right -of --way, <br />like retaining wall. A new retaining wall would have to go within the parcel itself, not within the right-of- <br />way space. <br />Mr. Larsen said when they had the home design for the new home on the southern portion, they asked that <br />the architect ensure that the hardcover minimums be met, even after the lots are separated. <br />Oakden explained hard covers and structural coverage is commonly accounted by lot total. The applicant <br />is saying that when they rebuilt their house, or when they put in for their application, they made sure that <br />their hardcover and their structural coverage totals would be met with just the southern portion as a <br />standalone parcel. So that if they were to divide off the north, they'd still be in compliance, and they <br />wouldn't be creating new, additional non -conformities regarding hardcover and structural coverage. <br />Libby asked having dealt with turnouts, turn lanes, and driveway aprons as much as you have, would you <br />anticipate them? If there was a feasibility of an egress from County Road 15, that there would be a <br />necessity for two? <br />Mr. Gronberg said usually for two houses, they aren't that particular, but they'd have to work through it <br />with them. They may want a short little deceleration lane and a short little acceleration lane. <br />65 <br />