10-17-2016 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

� MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEEETING Monday, September 19,2016 6:30 dclock p.m. 1. The property has been zoned and guided for 2-acre single-family development for many decades. The current Land Use Plan guiding for Low Density Residential Use by suggesting a density range of 0.5-2.0 units per acre was established to reflect the various historic densities of development within the defined Rural Area but was not intended to direct that land historically zoned for 2-acre lots should be changed to higher densities. The City specifically guided certain carefully selected properties for higher density in 2010 to meet Metropolitan Council goals. This was not one of those properties. Therefore, the proposed development is a significant departure from the historic planned development pattern for this site. The proposed RPUD element of the proposed subdivision would not appear to be similar in character to surrounding development. To the immediate west is the Sugar Woods residential neighborhood, to the immediate south of the property is a single-family residence on a 2.9 acre lot. Beyond that, in the City of Long Lake are the West Shore Townhomes and the Lake Community Bank. To the southwest is the Orono Woods Senior Housing residence. 2. If higher density for a portion of the site is deemed to be acceptable, is the Planning Commission comfortable with the 15-000-20,000 square foot lot sizes generally proposed in the RPUD portion of the site? Do these lot sizes provide a reasonable transition between the rura] 2-acre lots to the north and the variety of development types to the west and south? 3. Portions of the property located less than 250 feet from the creek or less than 250 feet from the ordinary high water level of Long Lake are not eligible to be rezoned to RPUD nor are they subject to flexibility in tertns of lot standards. The applicants are requesting that these areas be included in the RPUD rezoning in order to allow flexibility due to the physical limitations o the site. 4. Due to the number of units to be served, the proposed overall density of development and the use of municipal sewer and water systems, it could be argued that the road system should be public. Applicants are prepared for the road to be private. The Planning Commission should discuss the merits of this being a public or private road. 5. The Planning Commission should discuss whether this development should be required to create the RPUD standard 10 percent private recreation area and whether the proposed internal trail system would satisfy that requirement. Gaffron noted the topography is very rolling in this area, with some wetlands along the north in the creek area, a linear wetland centrally located, and along the lakeshore. Gaffron pointed out the location of the existing house on the overhead. Gaffron indicated the applicants have a presentation they would like to give to the Planning Commission. Tom Goodrurn, Westwood Professional Services, stated this project has been three years in the making and that they have spent a lot of time and effort designing the development. Goodrum noted their team has worked in the area for a number of years developing properties. Page 7 of 23