My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-08-2021 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2020-2024
>
2021
>
02-08-2021 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/24/2021 8:30:15 AM
Creation date
2/24/2021 8:30:09 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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,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 /> Walsh said what he is reading in this is the County is saying"we don't want to do this,but if you come up <br /> with something that shows it has to be and you have some analysis that shows us,we're putting that <br /> burden on you." That is basically what they are saying which is the same thing Mattick said. <br /> Johnson read from the screen"the City engineering is welcome to come to a different conclusion,"so are <br /> they the local authority having jurisdiction. <br /> Mattick said they are. If the City wants to pay for a full engineering study that somehow says the County <br /> took a pass on this one,we're going to dig in and prove that those turn lanes are absolutely necessary <br /> based on sound engineering criteria,then they are free to do so. He said they do not have that right now; <br /> what they have are inclinations that it is busy down there. <br /> Walsh stated the County could say in the end, "now we agree with your point but for$4,000,000 we're <br /> not going to do this;however,if the City wants to come up with$4,000,000 you can do it." It looks like <br /> the County has given their general answer. <br /> Johnson does not know the context of this email,and he does not know how many lots they were talking <br /> about at the time. <br /> Barnhart said it was 7 lots at the time of the email. <br /> Johnson is in favor of putting a motion together that tables the application until the City Council has <br /> clarity about what turn lanes are feasible by the County. <br /> Walsh said it sounds like they already know—they just answered it right there. <br /> Johnson stated the County just said they are not going to pay for it, so is this a condition of the <br /> development. <br /> Barnhart replied no,the attached letter is a condition of the development. Staff put in as a recommended <br /> condition that Hennepin County approval of the road access/intersection-and they could certainly add <br /> the word turn lane(s)in there—is what they put in as a condition of approval for the preliminary plat. <br /> Touching back on the timeline,it is situated such that Barnhart is asking for direction tonight and he will <br /> come back with a resolution of either approval or denial at the next City Council meeting. He does not <br /> have the authority to extend the timeline himself. <br /> Crosby said unless he is missing something he does not see how the City Council can deny this. <br /> Walsh stated they are not looking for any more input right now. <br /> Crosby noted if everything is done as required,everything is fitting in,they cannot hold their hand in the <br /> air and say they do not like five houses,they want three or two. He would say put one house but they <br /> cannot do that. <br /> Walsh said that is true. <br /> Page 22 of 26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.