Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, October 15, 2012 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />  Page  <br />12  <br />  <br />   <br />to walk. For the safety of the people, the City has to continue to make that request. As the City sees with <br />other trails, the usage is growing and they are a nice amenity. <br /> <br />Landgraver noted Staff recommended a modified Option 1. Landgraver asked if there is an agreement to <br />follow Staff’s recommendation for less site disturbance or whether the Planning Commission needs to <br />discuss that further. <br /> <br />Curtis stated the Planning Commission should discuss anything that is contrary to what the applicant’s <br />plan is proposing <br /> <br />Gronberg stated he likes the option proposed by Staff and that it would be less cost to Mr. Lein and would <br />grow up natural over the years. <br /> <br />Lein stated he would like to keep it as natural as possible. <br /> <br />Landgraver asked what would happen with the bridge. <br /> <br />Lein stated the bridge would go with the lot. <br /> <br />Landgraver asked whether the Planning Commission needs to do anything further with that. <br /> <br />Curtis stated at the time the final plat comes before the Planning Commission, the bridge could be <br />addressed. Staff does not care if someone lives in the existing house after the lot is sold. <br /> <br />Levang asked if Staff knows the status of the septic on the lot with the existing house. <br /> <br />Curtis indicated Staff has reviewed the proposed sites and they are acceptable. <br /> <br />Landgraver stated the wetlands and fees are beyond the scope of the Planning Commission. Landgraver <br />indicated he is in agreement with the request for a trail easement simply because there is a trail connection <br />possible. <br /> <br />Gronberg asked if the trail easement is in conjunction with the standard drainage and utility easement. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated typically drainage and utility easements are concurrent with the trail easement and that is <br />Staff’s expectation in this case. <br /> <br />Gronberg asked whether Hennepin County would be commenting on this application. <br /> <br />Curtis stated Hennepin County may still respond on this application. <br /> <br />Gaffron stated Hennepin County does not have any need for that right-of-way at the present time and that <br />the City would rather Hennepin County negotiate with the individual homeowners if they feel the need for <br />that right-of-way. <br /> <br />Schoenzeit asked if the applicant is acceptable with the concurrent easement and trail. <br /> <br />Lein stated he is not in favor of the trail easement at all.