Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, October 10, 2016 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />11. #16-3855 ERIC AND ANDREA LARSON, 690 BROW ROAD NORTH, SCOTT AND <br />JEANNE MABUSTH, 740 BROWN ROAD NORTH — SKETCH PLAN REVIEW (continued) <br />The current Land Use Plan guiding for Low Density Residential Use by suggesting a density <br />range of 0.5-2.0 units per acre was established to reflect the various historic densities of <br />development within the defined Rural Area but was not intended to direct that land historically <br />zoned for two -acre lots should be changed to higher densities. <br />The City specifically guided certain carefully selected properties for higher density in 2010 to <br />meet Metropolitan Council goals. This was not one of those properties. Therefore, the proposed <br />development is a significant departure from the historic planned development pattern for this site. <br />2. If higher density for a portion of the site is deemed to be acceptable, is the City Council <br />comfortable with the 15-000-20,000 square foot lot sizes generally proposed in the RPUD portion <br />of the site? Do these lot sizes provide a reasonable transition between the rural 2 -acre lots to the <br />north and the variety of development types to the west and south? <br />3. Portions of the property located less than 250 feet from the creek or less than 250 feet from the <br />ordinary high water level of Long Lake are not eligible to be rezoned to RPUD nor are they <br />subject to flexibility in terms of lot standards. The applicants are requesting that these areas be <br />included in the RPUD rezoning in order to allow flexibility due to the physical limitations of the <br />site. <br />4. Due to the number of units to be served, the proposed overall density of development and the use <br />of municipal sewer and water systems, it could be argued that the road system should be public. <br />The applicants are prepared for the road to be private. The City Council should discuss the merits <br />of this being a public or private road. <br />The City Council should discuss whether this development should be required to create the <br />RPUD standard 10 percent private recreation area and whether the proposed internal trail system <br />would satisfy that requirement. <br />Gaffron stated in regards to the Metropolitan Council sewered density analysis, the City has re- <br />established enough buffer to allow expansion of MUSA services in areas historically guided for low <br />densities. That buffer currently is large enough to accommodate either the applicants' proposed 25 -unit <br />development or a 10 -unit development with 2 -acre lots. Development of 10 units will result in a greater <br />decrease in the buffer than if it is developed with 25 units. <br />Gaffron noted the City has received additional written comments that are before the Council tonight. <br />Gaffron indicated the applicants have a presentation they would like to give to the City Council. <br />McMillan asked Staff to provide some background on the 2000 Comprehensive Plan as it relates to 2 -acre <br />sewered lakeshore lots. <br />Gaffron stated in 2000, the City recognized that there were a number of areas of the City that were <br />sewered but never rezoned or re -guided, such as Minnetonka Bluffs, Stubbs Bay Northeast and <br />Northwest, or the Crystal Bay neighborhood. <br />Page 10 of 26 <br />