Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 1999 <br />(#5) #2480 SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB, 725 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - <br />PRELIMINARY PLAT - RESOLUTION NO. 4281. <br />Tim Johnson and Thomas Crosby were present. <br />Gaffron presented the staff report. He said that Spring Hill Golf Club was issued a <br />Conditional Use Permit in 1997 and one of the conditions of approval was that they formally <br />grant Conservation and Flowage Easements to the City over the various wetlands and <br />drainageways on the property. He said there were also some new wetlands that were created <br />and some ponding areas that were created from wetlands. Due to the number of wetlands and <br />drainageways, and the complexity of their descriptions. Spring Hill has chosen to dedicate <br />these easement areas on a plat. The request also includes the vacation of two pre-existing <br />conservation and flowage easements which will be replaced by larger easements. Two outlots <br />will be created that are not buildable, but could be sold to a neighboring property. A portion <br />of tlie property is in Medina and the applicant has been advised to contact Medina regarding <br />that portion of the property. Gaffron said there is an issue regarding the width of right-of-way <br />for County Road 6. Hennepin County has requested an expansion of the County Road 6 right- <br />of-way. The majority of the right-of-way for County Road 6 is 80 ’ which is the minimum <br />requirement in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The County is requesting that Spring Hill <br />dedicate additional right-of-way to accommodate any future roadway upgrading plus paths, <br />utilities, snow storage, signage, etc. Hermepin County has designated this portion of County <br />Road 6 as part of their bikeway system. The bikeway plan indicates to Cities that when there <br />is a subdivision or platting process, the County would like to have additional right-of-ways <br />granted. When the City complies with that, then the County will share 50/50 for any future <br />acquisition costs. But if, at the time of platting, the County finds that the City refuses to <br />require the additional right-of-way, then if it’s ever needed and the County has to acquire it, <br />they want to charge the City 100%. Gaffron said this subdivision is unique because it is not <br />creating any new buildable lots, it’s merely platting in order to create some easements for <br />drainage purposes. Because of that there is no real connection between the need for additional <br />right-of-way and anything that is being created by this development. He thinks there is a <br />strong case to say that there is no basis for the City to require the additional right-of-way. <br />Spring Hill has developed their course in a manner where they would suffer by having to give <br />up ten feet of right-of-way along County Road 6. <br />Jabbour asked if County is asking for right-of-way all along County Road 6. <br />Gaffron said the Cou.'^ts is asking for the right-of-way along the entire length of County Road <br />6. <br />Jabbour asked if Gaffron’s position is the same for the whole length of County Road 6. <br />Page 7