Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,July 19,2021 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Barnhart had asked Mr. Erickson to confirm the offer of$100,000—which he did-and the City Council <br /> will determine what an appropriate use is for that money.He would suggest Gettman add that as part of <br /> the recommendation. <br /> Mr.Erickson clarified if he had specified that the$100,000 be used for improvement of a public access <br /> such as Stubbs Bay Road,then the DNR objection would have been nullified. <br /> Amended Motion by Gettman to include the$100,000 contribution to the General Fund with his <br /> original motion.Motion seconded by Kirchner. <br /> Ressler clarified the only reason he would be opposed in this vote is because he is concerned over the cost <br /> of what the cul-de-sac is going to be as that would be on the burden of the City.He also feels the adequate <br /> benefit to the City and would be okay with vacating the public access. <br /> McCutcheon said they never want to take away value. He sees this neighborhood and it is a really quiet <br /> street.Yes,there was access to Lake Minnetonka but no one used it because it was not really feasible. <br /> Putting a cul-de-sac there may make it feasible and may impact their value. He sees the point they make <br /> about creating a cul-de-sac and making something more accessible that was not there before. In thinking <br /> about that he feels for the neighborhood and from a citizen point-of-view it is not a great access as the <br /> cattails are 8 feet tall for 50 feet of lake.He may change a bit and is not in support of the public easement, <br /> but he is supportive of the vacation and taking away the pedestrian traffic. <br /> Bollis said speaking as the only non-lake resident right now,he does not see a problem with keeping <br /> access to the lake for those that do not live on the lake. It will be a no for him because even if they include <br /> the easement for people to walk on it,he still feels like the cul-de-sac is going to cost more than the <br /> $100,000 being donated. <br /> Kirchner hears that concern and noted earlier there was discussion about requiring the developer to pay <br /> for the cul-de-sac.This vacation would need to happen before a cul-de-sac would be approved and the <br /> Planning Commission approving a vacation does not necessarily mean that a cul-de-sac is going in next <br /> year,five years,ten years...it just means that the right-of-way exists in order to do so. <br /> Barnhart believes the intention is that the vacation would occur,and the platting would be completed <br /> before the street project next year. The intention of the engineering department is that the cul-de-sac and <br /> street pavement would occur at the same time. <br /> Gettman commented that the cul-de-sac seems to be an advantage for the public so he does not <br /> necessarily suggest that the developer be the one responsible for all of it. They are vacating part of the <br /> land and for utilities, for emergency vehicles,for deliveries, and everything else. Cul-de-sacs are things <br /> they are always asking for and in this case the road will get done anyway. The benefit for the public is to <br /> have a turnaround access as it is safer.He does not see the advantage of giving up the public access <br /> because it is one of two public access points to that part of the lake.That is his struggle with trying to <br /> combine them. <br /> Mayor Dennis Walsh, 1354 Rest Point Circle,wants to clarify the road.He asked the Commissioners not <br /> to forget that the City already owns the road that is all the way through the middle,they already have the <br /> easement to the right;they are only talking about approximately 25%of the cul-de-sac that Mr. Erickson <br /> will give the City the land for.If the City is responsible for all of the rest of the cul-de-sac,he clarified <br /> Page 7 of 18 <br />