Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,February 8,2021 <br /> 6:03 p.m. <br /> 19. LA20-000048-TIMOTHY WHITTEN O/B/O I.JACOBS/A.JACOBS REVOCABLE <br /> TRUST, 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE,PRELIMINARY PLAT-RESOLUTION—Continued <br /> of them with that code. If they can say this should be a five-acre minimum but it is not zoned five acres <br /> now,that is the issue they must work with. He said to deny something that conforms will now create a <br /> problem for the City. <br /> Attorney Mattick answered in the affirmative. <br /> Walsh noted that would be denial of the value of the property owner's real estate and that is an issue. <br /> That does not mean that the Burwell's cannot challenge whatever they want on whatever is going on with <br /> Hennepin County,it does not stop any of that. Anything the City Council still does has all the <br /> contingencies in place to meet the code that they have to meet, which they are following to the T and is <br /> about the best they can do besides coming up with something made up that is not there right now. He <br /> cannot find that either and is kind of in the same boat as Johnson. <br /> Crosby said the City Council can hold teeth that the Burwells will not give up any of their property for <br /> any of this. <br /> Walsh clarified nothing can make them do that to begin with. <br /> Attorney Mattick asked to comment on that. He said it has been said but he thinks it is worth reinforcing. <br /> Hennepin County is saying that the turn lane needs to go in, so historically what Orono has done, <br /> especially when roads are under a different entity's jurisdiction, is to look at their comments and <br /> implement those comments. He said this approval,Hennepin County's wishes—none of that entitles <br /> anyone to go outside that right-of-way. Hennepin County has that road right-of-way so in his opinion <br /> they can build things like turn lanes in that right-of-way. However,none of this gives anyone access to <br /> the Burwell's property, period. Not without their consent which has been made clear will not happen. He <br /> clarified that none of the City's approvals,Hennepin County's approvals,none of that gives them any <br /> approval. <br /> Crosby asked isn't it true that sometimes people own property that is part of the right-of-way. <br /> Attorney Mattick does not know how this is done. <br /> Crosby said that is the one caveat; even if it is still"part of the right-of-way"is it still her property. The <br /> right-of-way gives the ability to go on something, fix something,rectify a line,but put it back to the way <br /> it was. <br /> Walsh stated that would be more of an easement than a right-of-way. <br /> Attorney Mattick does not know as the Counties and the State have started to change—he assumes this <br /> was acquired a long time ago, and he does not know if they acquired it in clear via easement as every <br /> entity does it differently. In terms of it going back to the way it was,he said let's be clear it is not,as <br /> there will be a turn lane there instead of what is there now. <br /> Seals said she does not feel good about this one either. She was hoping the Councilmembers would have <br /> magically seen something that she did not see and was hoping Barnhart would show some lines that <br /> Page 18 of 26 <br />