My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-19-2010 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2010
>
04-19-2010 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/14/2012 3:40:58 PM
Creation date
8/14/2012 3:40:51 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
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
1l4INUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCII�ME��TIlVG <br /> Monday,April 9,2407 <br /> 7:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> {14. #07-3271 JUDSONM.DAYTON, 825 OLD CRYSTAL BAYROAD SOUTH, Continued) <br /> three units per acre. In the event tb.at the developer cannot connect to municipai sevver,each new lot <br /> must demonstrate the capability for two 5-bedroom capacity septic systems. , <br /> Gaffron stated hardcover is not expected to be an issue for the proposed lots as each Iot is allowed <br /> approximately 7,500 square feet of hardcover allowance in the 75-250 foot zone. Structural lot <br /> coverage limits do not apply,as each Iot exceeds two acres. <br /> Average lakeshore setback has the potential to become an issue for Lots 1,3,and 4. The existing home <br /> on Lot 2 is about 175 feet from the lake. The exisfing lakeshore residence in Little Orchard directly east <br /> of Lot 4 is also about 175 feet from the shore. It follows#hat the homes on Lots 3 and 4 should also be . <br /> 175 feet from the shore. This requirement could be established as part of the subdivision approvals, <br /> which would avoid concerns about fioating average setbacks. The average setback for Lot 1 would be <br /> defined by a line beiween the house on Lot 2 and the house at 3051 Farview Lane,which sits back more <br /> tban 400 feet from the lake. This would place the allowable building site on proposed Lot 1 about 290 <br /> feet from the shore. <br /> The wetlands on the site vc�ill be subject to the appropriate buffer requirements and conservation <br /> easements. Portions of the site are heavily wooded and portions are quite open.The existing bam and <br /> pasture areas visible from Old Crystal Bay Road add to Orono's rural character,as do the wooded <br /> backdrops behind them. It would be appropriate that development of fl�is site be subject to the <br /> principals of Conservation Design,identifying the inlportant aesthetic and ecological elements of the <br /> site and establishing a program for their preservation. <br /> Proposed Lot 2 contains a residence,a caretaker house,and a large I�orse barn with a caretaker <br /> aparfinent. The caretaker house was granted a conditional use permit for guest house use and additions �� <br /> in 1986. In 1992,the then 4,432 square foot horse bam was gt�anted a variance to expand to 5,168 <br /> square feet,where the Oversize Accessory Structures ordinance would l�ave allowed only a 3,000 square <br /> foot building. Also in 1992,a conditional use pernnit was granted for renovation and use of the <br /> cazetaker apartment in the bazn. <br /> Gaffron stated there aze a number of issues outlined in tlte xeport for consideration by the Council and <br /> that tliere are conservation design elements that should be identified and snbject to the principals of <br /> Conservation Design. <br /> Winston stated tlie lot lines would be rearranged but that basically the two lots in the southern portion of <br /> the property would remain two lots wifih slightly different lot Iines and a fourth lot being added.neaz Lot <br /> 3. Winston stated there are some accessory shvctures that they would like to retaii�for lustorical <br /> significance. <br /> Winston stated in his opinion it is not necessary to discuss in great detail aIl the issues associated with <br /> this development given that the property owner intends to preserve this area as is for as long as possible. <br /> Winston stated he did write a Ietter to Hennepin Counry but that he has not heard back from them at this <br /> point concerning the access. Winston stated he has been informed by Mark Gronberg that Hennepin <br /> Couniy is not troubled by the two exisfi.ing accesses but that they would Iike to see some improvements <br /> nnade to the driveway,such as relocati�g the driveway monuments to provide a better view and safety. <br /> Winston stated the two accesses would allow better circulation on the site as well as better emergency <br /> PAGE 13 of 22 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.