My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-12-1999 Council Special Meeting Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1999
>
04-12-1999 Council Special Meeting Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/6/2023 1:50:54 PM
Creation date
4/6/2023 1:50:42 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
first phase dciign, >vith 3-lcgs, tliat can be modified into a second phase, with a 4-Icgs, if the <br />county choost;;! to do tlte extra construction for County Road 19. Tom realizes that reconstruction <br />of tlic railroad bridj'.c and additional turn lanes would need to be a part of a second phase He <br />suggested tha: the cities talk to Ton O'kccfe at MnDot to verify tliat a first phase design is <br />possible for ni:)dification into a second phase. Tom said the cities could even make it part of the <br />record to te a{',rceable if a 3*leg intjrsection design was contingent on the possibility of a County <br />putting back llie 4“' leg. <br />As our convci‘ *iation evolved, I asked Tom if he could give me some guidelines for an undeveloped <br />property imme diately south of the intersection. I was referring to die Medina properties. I asked <br />him what wvHild be the required distances for a road or driveway to be from the intersection. He <br />responded, ii: ould vary on the specific situation, from a V* mile to 660 feet. The county s <br />preferences would be to have a sid». street seizing adjacent properties enter onto a county road in <br />lieu of numerous driveways. The side street would probably be required to have a left turn lane if it <br />served more than a half dozen properties. Tom agreed, since this property’ could be affected by the <br />draft of the trj nsportation plan, the county would be more than willing to »’cvicw development <br />plans and mal<e suggestions dial would work best if Townline road became County Road 19. In <br />tiiis situation, a city coidd certainly make acceptance of a developer’s plan contingent on the <br />counfy's rcvic'v. We arc interested in what happens to diis development because it could become a <br />better access to our property in Or<Mio. <br />1 would like tlic cities involved to consider die intbniiation 1 ha\c noted above. <br />Personally, I ticlicvc tliat doing notliing at all at die intersection of Hwy. 12, CR. 29 and Townlinc <br />Road seri'es the public the least in lie interest of safety. 1 don't believe that adding a traffic liglit on <br />the other side of Maple Plain will enhance the safety of this intersection. <br />I believe rerouting our presently (reveled driveway' oft of Hwy. 12 would also serve die interest of <br />public safety. 1 believe our propert:es in Oroiio will definitely be affected on how the Medina <br />properties gel developed. The development of the Medina properties could be made contingent on <br />scix'ing ours I' itli access. We need the Cities’ support in making this hapjKn. <br />Could you consider accepting die closure of Townline Road at die Hw'y. 12 intersection if it were <br />cmitingcnt thal: it could be reopened by die County if dicy decided to reconstruct the railroad <br />bridge, put in ihc extra turn lanes and rebuild Tow-nlinc road as County Road 19? <br />Could it become part of die record or an agreement w idi Medina that, in order to be agreeable with <br />dci'clopmcnt C'f Medina properties, whether commercial or residential, it be contingent on including <br />us to have aco>^ to a road when developed? <br />Since^', <br />Jane SlauglitCiT <br />"00®UMS 0II0 I«‘j «" 19 V V .1 i; i:: e i iiiu. 6 G '" n. t o
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.