My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-18-1988 Planning Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
07-18-1988 Planning Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2023 4:31:18 PM
Creation date
9/14/2023 4:12:33 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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).
View images
View plain text
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.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.