Laserfiche WebLink
MIHUTBS OF THE PLMnilHG O SSIOV TI«6 HELD JULY 18, 1988 <br />CITY OF OROHO <br />CRYSTAL BAY ROAD IMPROVBHBilT <br />COHDITIOHAL USB PERMIT <br />PUBLIC HEARIHG <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. <br />Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the Conditional Use Permit <br />involves four properties on Crystal Bay Road. There are approximately 200 <br />lineal feet of roadbed that need to be restored as a result of the July 23, <br />1987 storm. Kelley asked interested parties if they had received a copy of <br />the proposal from the City. Some had received this information, others had <br />not. Mabusth said that there were two options the City was considering. <br />There was a revision to the plan in that there would be no fill, no <br />shoulder, but blacktop would extend right up to the posts and a guardrail <br />would be installed for safety approximately 3-1/2 feet high. <br />Tim Schupp stated that the road is not dedicated and never has been. <br />The concensus is that the residents do not want the City to maintain the <br />Road and would like the City to remove the Road. Kelley suggested this <br />matter be tabled until the residents could get with the City to work this <br />out. The residents indicated that they have been trying to work this out <br />with the City for one year and to date have had no success. Mabusth <br />suggested that the reasoning for the City not allowing the Road to be <br />closed may have to do with access for residents of Minnetonka Beach. Leesa <br />Anderson spoke, saying that her property is in both Minnetonka Beach and <br />Orono. She stated that because of the condition of the Road nobody uses it <br />and to her knowledge there have been no complaints by citizens of <br />Minnetonka Beach regarding the inaccessability of Crystal Bay Road. Kelley <br />stated that the concept of the residents wishing to turn asphalt back into <br />grassed area was in line with the City's comprehensive plan and felt an <br />alternative could be found. Mr. Lee Erger stated that the City told the <br />residents that Minnetonka Beach did not want the road closed. <br />Bill Wolfe stated that the preposed barrier was totally unacceptable to <br />him and that the City was not properly notifying residents when it came to <br />issues such as these. He proposed the following 6 items: <br />1. Stainless wire would be better than galvanized. <br />2. Drainage provisions behind the wall should be provided. <br />3. Support beams should extend into the ground <br />4. More Duckbills, 4 per post as opposed to 2 per post. <br />5. Treated 4* x 12', rather than 2' x 12' <br />6. Leaving bottom 5* of wall exposed and make aesthetically pleasing. <br />Mabusth pointed out that it would be the property owners' <br />responsibility to fill in the area between the retaining wall and the <br />lakeshore. Johnson said that any further discussion was academic since the <br />aspect of closing the Road entirely needed further exploration. Mabusth <br />believed that these avenues had already been explored and the matter <br />resolved for the City's part, that is why the conditional use permit had <br />been filed. In her opinion, there is great urgency to get this resolved.