Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,April 17,2017 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> encroachment from the adjacent home at 3560 Ivy; and the deck and driveway encroachments <br /> from 3560 Ivy. <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission have any concerns regarding mitigation of the impacts to <br /> floodplain,wetlands and trees that are likely with this proposed development?: Site re-grading <br /> over much of the property is anticipated with the proposed plan. <br /> 3. Access to the property for development/home construction is likely to be very difficult and will <br /> likely require heavy vehicles needing to access the property on a very narrow road and minimal <br /> accessibility without impacting the immediate neighbor. Contractor parking is likely to be <br /> difficult. The impacts to the neighborhood during the construction process, and especially to the <br /> adjoining residence, will likely be extreme. Applicant should be asked to address how these <br /> issues and impacts will be mitigated. <br /> 4. Does the Planning Commission have any concerns regarding the lot layouts and front-lot/back-lot <br /> configuration? The proposed house location on Lot 2 will require re-designation of yards in order <br /> to have a southerly setback less than 45 feet. As shown, the setback from that south line is ten <br /> feet and Staff would suggest that 15 feet be required per the back lot code if that is considered as <br /> a side yard. <br /> 5. Does the Planning Commission agree that the average lakeshore setback can be established at <br /> seventy-five feet from the lake for both Lots 1 and 2 as part of the replatting approval?? <br /> 6. Applicants should address possible stormwater management practices and facilities to be <br /> employed both during construction and on a permanent basis. <br /> 7. As part of the preliminary plat review process, comments will be requested from the public <br /> Works, Police and Fire Departments as to the impacts of development of this property over the <br /> short term and long term. <br /> Gaffron stated the goal of the sketch plan is to provide the developer with an overview of the pertinent <br /> City ordinances and how they affect the proposal. <br /> Thiesse asked if that is a nonconforming cul-de-sac as it relates to length. <br /> Gaffron indicated he has not checked the length of the existing road to see if it meets City standards. It <br /> has been in existence since before the standard existed. <br /> Thiesse asked if a conditional use permit for fill is being requested. <br /> Gaffron stated it is likely additional such approvals will be required when a preliminary plat application is <br /> submitted. <br /> Curt Fretham, Lake West Development, stated when they first started on this project, Staff had requested <br /> that he obtain a letter from the Watershed District explaining their position on whether this is buildable or <br /> not buildable. Fretham indicated he does have that letter and it has been submitted. The second item that <br /> Staff requested be addressed was the"mesic oak forest"designation(shown in the Hennepin County <br /> Page 32 of 48 <br />