Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTH OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 18, 1991 <br />#1691 & 1702 — CONT. <br />•Chair Kelley asked if the City of Long Lake understood the <br />ramifications of a limited lot coverage. <br />Roos said they understood it to include the principal residence <br />and all outbuildings on the property. He clarified that Lot 1 <br />would have a 25' setback from Orono Orchard Road. <br />Chair Kelley asked how the City would safeguard that the zoning <br />restrictions imposed would not change. <br />Mabusth noted that restrictions would be included within the <br />covenant, and the City could specifically note all setbacks for <br />each lot. <br />Chair Kelley asked what about changes in Orono's regulations, <br />would they apply? <br />Mabusth informed him that the property would be subject to <br />current restrictions. <br />Council member Callahan noted that the regulations for the <br />property will be frozen in time. If changes to the covenants are <br />proposed, they would have to be approved by both cities. <br />is <br />Bellows noted that part of their process was to approve the final <br />drainage and grading plans which have not been supplied and felt <br />the application should be tabled until all pertinent information <br />was supplied. <br />Chair Kelley asked that guest house use, rental apartments, home <br />occupations, and duplex use be addressed in the covenant. <br />Mabusth stated that pertinent standards of the R -1A zoning <br />district could be incorporated within the covenant. <br />Kellenburger noted that it is interesting that the City of Long <br />Lake is endorsing the southern corridor for Highway 12 <br />considering the impact upon this property. <br />Chair Kelley stated that he could not comment on that issue. <br />Council member Goetten felt the issue was not within the <br />Commission's jurisdiction. <br />Bellows felt it was a valid public opinion. <br />4 <br />Bellows <br />indicated she wanted <br />the Planning Commission to be able <br />to review <br />the covenant prior <br />to final approval. <br />SMabusth <br />noted that was not <br />typical procedure but it could be <br />returned <br />for review. <br />is <br />Bellows noted that part of their process was to approve the final <br />drainage and grading plans which have not been supplied and felt <br />the application should be tabled until all pertinent information <br />was supplied. <br />Chair Kelley asked that guest house use, rental apartments, home <br />occupations, and duplex use be addressed in the covenant. <br />Mabusth stated that pertinent standards of the R -1A zoning <br />district could be incorporated within the covenant. <br />Kellenburger noted that it is interesting that the City of Long <br />Lake is endorsing the southern corridor for Highway 12 <br />considering the impact upon this property. <br />Chair Kelley stated that he could not comment on that issue. <br />Council member Goetten felt the issue was not within the <br />Commission's jurisdiction. <br />Bellows felt it was a valid public opinion. <br />4 <br />