11-13-1995 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 13, 1995 ( #9 - #2065 Scotch Pine Lane - Continued) • Kelley inquired if the Hill's had lakeshore property. Gaffron said the lot to the lakeshore was a narrow stria. The Hill's had two separate tax statements. Gaffon said an outlot was created by the shared driveway serving the Hill and Marfield properties. The road when vacated would be split up between the three parties. The Hill's would then have one lot. A portion of the cul -de -sac would become part of the Toles property, who will have a new driveway off of CoRd 51. In discussions with the Long Lake Fire Department and the City Engineer, the emergency access was reviewed. The current layout is excellent for emergencies but the fire department determined, with additional driveway width, the vacation could occur and still allow room for emergencv vehicle staging. The Citv Engineer initially questioned this decision and recommended denial. He raised the issues of wetland easements and definition, and drainage. It was determined that the current catch basin would be eliminated and filled in to allow for overland drainage. Gaffron reported that the Public Works Director and Orono Police Department reviewed the oronosal and recommended approval. The Citv would no longer be required to maintain the road. As part of the packet, documentation provided by the applicants notes the problem with the public attempting to gain access to the lake via Scotch Pine Lane, • which has no access. The Hennepin County Public Works Department has also given their preliminary approval. The Planning Commission recommended approval by a 4:1 vote. CJ Gaffron said there was a problem with the high number of utility easements in the area and the concern with sewer lines and connections. This would need to be addressed prior to final approval. Gaffron noted that the power line running along the perimeter lot line falls outside of the proposed 10' easement. It was further noted that the owners would give the necessary easements. Gaffron was asked if the City was attempting to clean up the utility easements because of the proposal. Gaffron said it was brought up by the vacation but the need was there for the easements to be addressed. Gaffron questioned the vacation of the public road and the replat. He noted rural zoning required two acre parcels for any new development. Also, any new development would require a private road to be built to the standards which this road currently meets. Gaffron questioned vacating and eliminating a road that would be required today to serve these three lots.