My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-08-2017 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2010-2019
>
2017
>
05-08-2017 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/24/2019 2:42:35 PM
Creation date
5/24/2019 2:27:18 PM
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.
/
488
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, April 24, 2017 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS — Continued <br />Edwards stated it is important to note that a number of things have happened with the road as a result of <br />this project and that in his view it would be important to invite Hennepin County to discuss this prior to <br />the City Council taking formal action on this item. Edwards noted there has been a change in the curb <br />location in that it moves south from where it currently is, the addition of a trail, and the removal of the <br />center medians along Wayzata Boulevard that now allows left turns into that business. Edwards stated <br />since there have been a number of design considerations that have gone into the plan, it might be prudent <br />to hear those in detail from the County. <br />Seals asked what the time frame is on this project. <br />Edwards stated it will be mid to late May before concrete is poured. <br />Rosha noted around three years ago, this was not an operating business and there were just a few <br />businesses on the side of the mall and not people with boats, which is not the case today. Rosha stated he <br />does understand that there is a conversation about a trail and the other changes but that the driveway is <br />currently 80 feet wide. Rosha noted the temporary driveway is now the narrower width, and the concern <br />is once the status quo changes, it changes the obligation for the property owner and that he now has to <br />come and prove why it should not be changed. Rosha stated if this is pushed out, that could leave them <br />with no option. <br />Mattick noted this is a county road, and while the County will work with the City and take some <br />suggestions on the design, as a county road, it is the County's project. Mattick stated if the Council <br />would like to do something to support the status quo, the Council can do it in the form of a resolution or <br />something else, but that the County may want to speak with the City about this. Mattick noted he cannot <br />draft the resolution tonight but that he can have something ready to go for the next meeting. <br />Rosha stated he will be in touch with the City Attorney. <br />Reeder suggested the County be asked not to commit to pouring concrete until the City is able to meet <br />with them. <br />Walsh concurred with that suggestion. Walsh noted this is Phase I of the project and that there are three <br />phases total and that at times things are fluid. Walsh stated philosophically he supports the right of the <br />property owner to retain what he currently has. <br />Brad Erickson, 2160 Wayzata Boulevard, stated all the city codes were in place when they chose to make <br />it as wide as they did and that none of the codes have changed since that time. Erickson stated he is not <br />sure if there are any studies that were done to prompt them to leave it that wide but that there likely is <br />something. Erickson noted in 1999 or 2000 was when the road was redone the last time. <br />Erickson noted they were involved early on in the planning process and that they never wanted the <br />narrower driveway in the first place. Erickson stated he does not want to see his rights as a property <br />owner be trampled on for some theoretical reason and that he has four years of experience that shows it is <br />not an issue. Erickson noted with the removal of the median, they will be doubling the amount of traffic <br />in and out of that entrance and that it does not make any sense to reduce the width when the amount of <br />traffic will increase. <br />Page 4 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.