My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-19-2025 - Agenda Packet Planning Commission - Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2025
>
05-19-2025 - Agenda Packet Planning Commission - Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/12/2026 10:57:18 AM
Creation date
5/21/2025 3:21:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Administration
Admin Doc Type
Agenda Packet Planning Commission
Section
Planning Commission
Subject
Planning Commission Packet
Document Date
5/19/2025
Retention Effective Date
5/21/2025
Retention
Permanent After File Date
Protection
Public
Text box
ID:
1
Creator:
Katie Fitzsimmons
Created:
5/21/2025 3:22 PM
Modified:
5/21/2025 3:22 PM
Text:
https://library.municode.com/mn/orono/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TITVILAUS_CH78ZORE_ARTIVDIRE_DIV11RPREPLUNDEDI_S78-621PU
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
123
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
FILE # LA25-000019 <br />May 19, 2025 <br />Page 4 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION <br />1. Although they both reflect principles of an RPUD, neither Northgate Two nor Hill O’ Way <br />Manor was created as an RPUD. Does the Commission find that the property’s proximity and <br />proposed design meet the exception criteria for RPUD applicability? <br />2. Does the Commission find it appropriate to amend the density guidance for this 1.0-acre <br />property? <br />3. The RPUD process is available to meet certain city goals for density, housing diversity, energy <br />conservation, preservation of natural features, etc.. Does the applicant’s plan, including the <br />proposed density, meet those goals? <br />4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> <br />PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS <br />The proposed density is below the guidance for the property. A comprehensive plan amendment to reduce <br />the density of a one-acre property would be inconsistent with the city’s goals. The property can be <br />redeveloped under the existing conditions as a single lot with one home, or consider a third lot (3 <br />units/acre) following the layout of Northgate Two. <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Planning Commission should address the issues for discussion and provide direction and guidance to the <br />applicant on the proposed Concept Plan. <br />32
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.