Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, February 8, 2021 <br />6:03 p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 18 of 26 <br /> <br />19. LA20-000048 - TIMOTHY WHITTEN O/B/O I. JACOBS/A. JACOBS REVOCABLE <br />TRUST, 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE, PRELIMINARY PLAT - RESOLUTION – Continued <br /> <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 /> <br />Attorney Mattick answered in the affirmative. <br /> <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 /> <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 /> <br />Walsh clarified nothing can make them do that to begin with. <br /> <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 /> <br />Crosby asked isn’t it true that sometimes people own property that is part of the right-of-way. <br /> <br />Attorney Mattick does not know how this is done. <br /> <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 /> <br />Walsh stated that would be more of an easement than a right-of-way. <br /> <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 /> <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