My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-11-2016 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2010-2019
>
2016
>
07-11-2016 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/16/2016 10:10:24 AM
Creation date
12/16/2016 9:46:00 AM
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.
/
860
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, June 27, 2016 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 10 <br /> <br />10. #16-3822 LAKEWEST DEVELOPMENT, 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD – <br />PRELIMINARY PLAT 2ND REVIEW – COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: <br />PRELIMINARY APPROVAL RESOLUTION – RESOLUTION NO. 6637 (continued) <br /> <br />Gaffron stated the entire site was guided based on five acres at approximately 10 to 15 units per acre. The <br />Metropolitan Council has on its book essentially a 50-unit development on this site. <br /> <br />Walsh asked if it is guided for 10 to 15 units, whether that would increase the 3.0 unit density number. <br /> <br />McMillan noted it is not included now. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated it is difficult for the Metropolitan Council to accept the City’s guiding on a piece of land <br />that is currently not developable and requires mitigation. <br /> <br />Walsh asked if the City should give some guiding for that piece of land so future homeowners will know <br />what will potentially be on that piece of property. <br /> <br />McMillan stated there are a lot of unknowns at this time given the fact that it is a former landfill site. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated it would be necessary to make sure that the people who live here understand the potential <br />development in the future and that the road does not just end here for no reason. Gaffron stated that <br />potential would need to be incorporated into the documents in some manner. <br />Walsh commented that appears to be a good middle ground solution since in the future that could be a <br />high-density property. <br /> <br />McMillan noted the fire chief recommends a 32-foot wide road, and if it is only 28 feet wide, he would <br />suggest on-street parking be limited to one side. McMillan stated the City Council does not need to deal <br />with that this evening since it would be part of the preliminary plat review. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated widening the road would impact how close the homes are to the road. <br /> <br />McMillan noted this development is five units per acre. <br /> <br />Walsh asked if there is a sidewalk. <br /> <br />Gaffron indicated at this point no sidewalk is proposed and that the road width is 28 feet from back of <br />curb to back of curb. Gaffron stated adding two feet on either side of the road would result in two feet <br />being taken off of each driveway. Because of how the driveways are situated, there is room for maybe <br />one car between driveways. Gaffron stated the lots are narrow and individual driveways are pretty <br />uniform in the gaps between them. <br /> <br />McMillan asked if the City should consider a future second access in the event anything is developed on <br />the landfill site. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated if it is possible at all, it should be made accessible for emergency vehicles. <br /> <br />McMillan stated in her view a second access should be planned for in the event the landfill site is ever <br />developed.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.