My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-25-2015 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
10-25-2015 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2015 2:29:01 PM
Creation date
12/1/2015 2:23:50 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
266
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
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 12, 2015 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 10 of 37 <br /> <br />8. #15-3770 JON NORRIS AND CATHERINE MORRISON AND PATRICK AND <br />MELISSA MULHERN, 460 ORCHARD PARK ROAD, PRELIMINARY PLAT (continued) <br /> <br />Gaffron pointed out the Whelan property and the Jacob Mills property. Hennepin County and MN/DOT <br />stated there is a possibility access could come around the edge of the wetland and up to County Road 6 <br />rather than going up the hill to County Road 6. Gaffron noted that option would require review by the <br />Jacob Mills’ homeowners association. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated another option would be to continue the 33-foot corridor out to Orchard Park Road, which <br />would be very expensive since it would need to go through some wetland. Gaffron stated from a county <br />and state perspective, the Whelans do have access options but that access has not been resolved yet. <br />Gaffron noted he has not heard from the Whelans. <br /> <br />McMillan stated she wanted everyone to be aware that access to the Whelan property still needs to be <br />determined. McMillan asked if the septic needs to be tested. <br /> <br />Gaffron indicated it has been tested and it has been confirmed that there is room for an alternative site on <br />that lot. <br /> <br />McMillan stated as it relates to the southern pole barn, the proposed location is not near the proposed <br />driveway, but the northern pole barn is located closer to the driveway. McMillan stated she is not sure <br />how important it is to have the barns near a paved access and whether the two barns should be located <br />closer to one another. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated this is an issue that could be discussed with the applicant. <br /> <br />McMillan asked if the applicant would like to address any of the issues. <br /> <br />It was noted the applicant is not present. <br /> <br />Mark Gronberg, Surveyor, indicated he has worked on this application and that the idea was to have the <br />pole barns in front of the existing building. Gronberg noted the locations depicted on the plans may not <br />be the exact locations but that the barns would likely be west of the existing home. <br /> <br />McMillan stated the southern pole barn is more of an issue since it is closer to the traveled roadway. <br /> <br />Levang asked if it would be visible. <br /> <br />Gronberg indicated the roof might be for some homes to the southwest or southeast but that these are <br />pretty big lots and there are a number of trees that would help shield the barn. <br /> <br />McMillan asked what the Council feels about a landscaping plan. <br /> <br />Levang stated in her view there is enough natural landscaping and that the City does not have to require <br />additional landscaping. Levang stated her only issue with the one pole barn was whether it would be <br />visible from the street, and if that was the case, she would be inclined not to be in favor of it. <br /> <br />Gronberg stated the location of the pole barn could be worked out at the time of the building permit.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.