06-15-2020 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Ressler said one of things he heard from Staff was the Commission would need DNR feedback as far as vacating the access. There would probably need to be a contingency. Libby stated the idea of removing the hard surface blacktop is a benefit, because he was there after heavy rainfall. It is a narrow thoroughfare, and if it were salted or traffic were coming in and out of the extension beyond the cul-de-sac, it is inevitable that effluents and surface contamination will run straight into Lake Minnetonka. He felt everyone was in favor of minimizing or eliminating that. The offer to remediate the blacktop and take it out is commensurate to somebody who is willing to put their money where their mouth is. He is in favor of the proposal as a sketch plan. Gettman said he had nothing further to add. Kirchner noted he drove by the area and,having an SUV,understands the interest in having a cul-de-sac in the location, because it took him a while to get turned around once he had driven down the street past driveways. He agreed with the previous comments that it seems to be a public benefit to have a cul-de-sac to allow for vehicles turning around. Although there is lake access/a public right-of-way,unless someone lived there or were making a delivery,he did not know how someone would end up on that street. He does not think it attracts people and does not think he would have ever been on the street except for the agenda item. He is supportive of the sketch plan, and they can continue to follow through on the DNR side of things as well as seek public feedback. Ressler said DNR feedback is going to be a pivoting factor for him, among other things. There are a lot of these types of things scattered around the City. There are rules in favor of granting situations like this, and there have been times the City has approved and times the City has denied. He noted it is hard to make heads or tails as to what the citizens' opinions are. In one case the citizens were staunchly opposed because they alleged they used the public access. In this case it is not developed for access and he did not know if it would even be considered access in the winter because of the wetlands, etc.,in the area. He suggested there could be use of the access by the neighbors if it was made available to them like it is right now. He reiterated DNR feedback would be important because the area could not be used for access without changing stuff and getting approval.There is a total of five other accesses on the bay,with one of them just down the street.He is trying to gauge what the City Council's opinions are. The Commissioners represent the City's citizens in that if there is usage for it,that's one thing; if there is also a potential future need for emergency vehicles,that's another; if there's maintenance on it,that's a third. If the first two are not happening, it is a burden for the City more than anything else. He said it would be prudent to ask for DNR feedback,but it generally makes sense to him based on the points noted. Libby added the Park Commission would need to also give feedback. Mr. Erickson commented that when the lot line got rearranged in 1999,the City Council voted to forbid motorized traffic south of the cul-de-sac. In one other lake access situation that was on the agenda for a bit,there were a number of snowmobilers in the neighborhood who wanted to use it; however, not only is that not possible with this access because of vegetation,but snowmobilers have already been banned. 8. UPDATE ON APRIL 27,2020 COUNCIL MEETING Barnhart noted he left his notes in his office so he could not provide an update but would do so at the next meeting. Page 28 of 29